This study compared the cyclic fatigue resistance of nickel-titanium (NiTi) files obtained in a conventional test using a simulated canal with a newly developed method that allows the application of constant fatigue load conditions.

ProFile and K3 files of #25/.06, #30/.06, and #40/.04 were selected. Two types of testing devices were built to test their fatigue performance. The first (conventional) device prescribed curvature inside a simulated canal (C-test), the second new device exerted a constant load (L-test) whilst allowing any resulting curvature. Ten new instruments of each size and brand were tested with each device. The files were rotated until fracture and the number of cycles to failure (NCF) was determined. The NCF were subjected to one-way ANOVA and Duncan's post-hoc test for each method. Spearman's rank correlation coefficient was computed to examine any association between methods.

Spearman's rank correlation coefficient (ρ = -0.905) showed a significant negative correlation between methods. Groups with significant difference after the L-test divided into 4 clusters, whilst the C-test gave just 2 clusters. From the L-test, considering the negative correlation of NCF, K3 gave a significantly lower fatigue resistance than ProFile as in the C-test. K3 #30/.06 showed a lower fatigue resistance than K3 #25/.06, which was not found by the C-test. Variation in fatigue test methodology resulted in different cyclic fatigue resistance rankings for various NiTi files.

The new methodology standardized the load during fatigue testing, allowing determination fatigue behavior under constant load conditions.