This study compared the cyclic fatigue resistance of One Curve (C wire) and F6 Skytaper (conventional austenite nickel-titanium [NiTi]), and 2 instruments with thermo-mechanically treated NiTi: Protaper Next X2 (M wire) and Hyflex CM (CM wire).

Ten new instruments of each group (size: 0.25 mm, 6% taper in the 3 mm tip region) were tested using a rotary bending machine with a 60° curvature angle and a 5 mm curvature radius, at room temperature. The number of cycles until fracture was recorded. The length of the fractured instruments was measured. The fracture surface of each fragment was examined with a scanning electron microscope (SEM). The data were analyzed using one-way analysis of variance and the post hoc Tukey test. The significance level was set at 0.05.

At 60°, One Curve, F6 Skytaper and Hyflex CM had significantly longer fatigue lives than Protaper Next X2 (p < 0.05). No statistically significant differences were found in the cyclic fatigue lives of One Curve, F6 Skytaper, and Hyflex CM (p > 0.05). SEM images of the fracture surfaces of the different instruments showed typical features of fatigue failure.

Within the conditions of this study, at 60° and with a 5 mm curvature radius, the cyclic fatigue life of One Curve was not significantly different from those of F6 Skytaper and Hyflex CM. The cyclic fatigue lives of these 3 instruments were statistically significantly longer than that of Protaper Next.

The aim of this study was to compare the dimensional standard of several nickel-titanium (Ni-Ti) rotary files and verify the size conformity.

ProFile (Dentsply Maillefer), RaCe (FKG Dentaire), and TF file (SybronEndo) #25 with a 0.04 and 0.06 taper were investigated, with 10 in each group for a total of 60 files. Digital images of Ni-Ti files were captured under light microscope (SZX16, Olympus) at 32×. Taper and diameter at D₁ to D₁₆ of each files were calculated digitally with AnalySIS TS Materials (OLYMPUS Soft Imaging Solutions). Differences in taper, the diameter of each level (D₁ to D₁₆) at 1 mm interval from (ANSI/ADA) specification No. 101 were statistically analyzed using one-way ANOVA and Scheffe's post-hoc test at 95% confidence level.

TF was the only group not conform to the nominal taper in both tapers (p < 0.05). All groups except 0.06 taper ProFile showed significant difference from the nominal diameter (p < 0.05).

Actual size of Ni-Ti file, especially TF, was different from the manufacturer's statements.