SHAPING ABILITY OF NICKEL-TITANIUMROTARY FILES

Wan-Ky Park; Hee-Joo Lee; Bock Hur

doi:10.5395/JKACD.2004.29.1.44

Articles

Page Path: HOME > Restor Dent Endod > Volume 29(1); 2004 > Article

Original Article SHAPING ABILITY OF NICKEL-TITANIUMROTARY FILES: Wan-Ky Park^,, Hee-Joo Lee, Bock Hur; Journal of Korean Academy of Conservative Dentistry 2004;29(1):44-50.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.5395/JKACD.2004.29.1.44
Published online: January 14, 2004

Department of Conservative Dentistry, College of Dentisry, Pusan National University

Corresponding author: Wan-Ky Park, Department of Conservative Dentistry, College of Dentisry, Pusan National University 1-10, Ami-dong, Seo-gu, Pusan, 602-739, Korea, Tel : 051)240-7454, E-mail: beatl@freechal.com

This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

15 Views
0 Download

prev next

Full Article

Download PDF

Abstract
REFERENCES

Abstract

This study compared the shaping ability of nickel-titanium rotary files with different rake angle and radial land.

The nickel-titanium files used in this study were Profile(Dentsply, Maillefer, Ballaigues, Switzerland), Hero 642(Micromega, Besancon, France), and K3(SybronEndo, Glendora, Ca, USA) file. Resin blocks substituted for root canals. 36 resin blocks were divided into 3 groups with 12 canals each. The time for canal preparation was recorded. The images of pre- and postoperative resin canal were scanned and those were superimposed. Amounts of canal deviation, total canal widths, inner canal widths, and outer canal widths were measured at apical 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, and 7mm levels.

The amount of canal deviation was the smallest in Profile group, and the time for canal preparation was the shortest in Hero 642 group. K3 group resulted in competent characteristics in both measurements. Positive rake angle seemed to result in fast shaping of root canal and radial land guide the instrument in center of the canals and around curvatures. Radial land also tended to reduce the sense of screwing into the root canal.

The proper selection of the nickel-titanium file based on the knowledge about file design is needed for the safer, simpler and faster root canal therapy.
Keywords: Shaping abiliy; Nickel-titanium rotary file; Radial land; Rake angle

Fig. 1.

Superimposing images of pre- and postoperative blocks

Table 1.

Classification of groups

Group	Numbers of resin block	File system
P	12	Profile(Dentsply, Maillefer, Ballaigues Switzerland)
H	12	Hero 642(Micromega, Besancon, France)
K	12	K3(SybronEndo, Glendora, Ca., USA)

Table 2.

Design of each files

File system	Rake angle	Radial land
Profile(Dentsply, Maillefer, Ballaigues, Switzerland)	slight negative	Yes
Hero 642(Micromega, Besancon, France)	slight positive	No
K3(SybronEndo, Glendora, Ca, USA)	slight positive	Yes

Table 3.

Preparation sequence

Sequence	File	Working length(mm)
1	#30-.06T	12mm
2	#25-.06T	14mm
3	#20-.06T	16mm
4	#20-.04T	Working length
5	#20-.06T	Working length
6	#25-.06T	Working length

Table 4.

Time for canal preparation(second)

Sample No.	Profile	Hero 642	K3
1	162	120	136
2	165	116	129
3	160	118	133
4	145	115	138
5	160	124	134
6	148	115	130
7	140	105	134
8	162	120	129
9	170	106	119
10	167	110	135
11	163	114	119
12	150	125	124
Mean(SD)	157.7(±9.1)	115.7(±6.3)	130.0(±6.4)

Table 5.

Mean values(standard deviation) of total canal width, outer canal width, inner canal width, and amount of deviation of each groups(mm)

Distance from apex		1mm	2mm	3mm	4mm	5mm	6mm	7mm
Total canal width	Group P	0.237	0.312	0.378	0.402	0.465	0.506	0.573
		(±0.030)	(±0.026)	(±0.032)	(±0.034)	(±0.015)	(±0.059)	(±0.020)
	Group H	0.272	0.419	0.518	0.518	0.532	0.597	0.652
		(±0.046)	(±0.075)	(±0.056)	(±0.037)	(±0.027)	(±0.029)	(±0.029)
	Group K	0.266	0.375	0.476	0.476	0.537	0.591	0.636
		(±0.058)	(±0.016)	(±0.020)	(±0.023)	(±0.028)	(±0.038)	(±0.038)
Outer canal width	Group P	0.146	0.215	0.265	0.263	0.253	0.230	0.259
		(±0.026)	(±0.034)	(±0.045)	(±0.035)	(±0.016)	(±0.040)	(±0.036)
	Group H	0.159	0.294	0.372	0.326	0.270	0.251	0.283
		(±0.038)	(±0.066)	(±0.052)	(±0.053)	(±0.025)	(±0.027)	(±0.030)
	Group K	0.153	0.252	0.303	0.298	0.268	0.246	0.280
		(±0.044)	(±0.032)	(±0.032)	(±0.024)	(±0.023)	(±0.026)	(±0.041)
Inner canal width	Group P	0.091	0.097	0.113	0.139	0.212	0.277	0.314
		(±0.005)	(±0.015)	(±0.021)	(±0.027)	(±0.022)	(±0.034)	(±0.035)
	Group H	0.114	0.125	0.146	0.192	0.262	0.346	0.370
		(±0.014)	(±0.020)	(±0.032)	(±0.036)	(±0.044)	(±0.042)	(±0.046)
	Group K	0.113	0.123	0.113	0.178	0.269	0.346	0.357
		(±0.021)	(±0.022)	(±0.029)	(±0.017)	(±0.027)	(±0.040)	(±0.051)
Amount of deviation	Group P	-0.025	-0.118	-0.152	-0.124	-0.041	0.047	0.055
		(±0.023)	(±0.046)	(±0.062)	(±0.052)	(±0.035)	(±0.046)	(±0.068)
	Group H	-0.045	-0.170	-0.227	-0.135	-0.008	0.095	0.087
		(±0.033)	(±0.063)	(±0.065)	(±0.083)	(±0.066)	(±0.065)	(±0.071)
	Group K	-0.040	-0.128	-0.171	-0.120	0.001	0.100	0.077
		(±0.037)	(±0.053)	(±0.058)	(±0.035)	(±0.041)	(±0.057)	(±0.084)

Table 6.

Overview of file design

	Profile	Hero 642	K3
Rake angle	Negative	Positive	Positive
Radial land	Yes	No	Yes
Tip	Non-cutting	Non-cutting	Non-cutting
Helical flute angle	Consistent	Variable	Variable
Pitch	Consistent	Variable	Variable
Shank	Metal 15mm	Plastic 14mm	Metal 11.5mm

REFERENCES

1. Weine FS, Kelly RF, Lio PJ. The effect of preparation procedures on original canal shape and on apical foramen shape. J Endod 1:255-262. 1975.Article PubMed
2. Schilder H. Cleaning and shaping the root canal. Dent Clin North Am 18:269-296. 1974.Article PubMed
3. Coleman CL, Svec TA. Analysis of Ni-Ti versus stainless steel instrumentation in resin simulated canals. J Endod 23:232-235. 1997.Article PubMed
4. 박 한수, 이 민구, 김 종진, 임 영준, 장 문성, 이 종엽. ‘Three file’ 방식에 의한 만곡 근관 형성시 근관의 형태에 관한 연구. 대한 치과보존학회지 25:494-498. 2000.
5. 박 한수, 백 승호. ‘Two file’방식에 의한 근관 형성시 근관의 형태에 관한 연구. 대한치과보존학회지 26:507-511. 2001.
6. Walia HM, Brantley WA, Gerstein H. An initial investigation of the bending and torsional properties of Nitinol root canal files. J Endod 14:346-551. 1988.Article PubMed
7. Thompson SA. An overview of nickel-titanium alloys used in dentistry. Int Endod J 33:297-310. 2000.Article PubMed
8. Morgan LF, Montgomery S. An evaluation of the crown-down pressureless technique. J Endod 10:491-498. 1984.PubMed
9. Davis RD, Marshall JG, Baumgartner JC. Effect of early coronal flaring on working length change in curved canals using rotary nickel-titanium versus stainless steel instruments. J Endod 28:438-442. 2002.Article PubMed
10. Buchanan LS. The standardized-taper root canal preparation–Part 1. Concepts for variably tapered shaping instruments. Int Endod J 33:516-529. 2000.Article PubMed
11. Barrieshi-Nusair KM. Gutta-percha retreatment effectiveness of nickel-titanium rotary instruments versus stainless steel hand files. J Endod 28:454-456. 2002.Article PubMed
12. Sattapan B, Nervo GJ, Palamara JE, Messer HH. Defects in rotary nickel-titanium files after clinical use. J Endod 26:161-165. 2000.PubMed
13. Powell SE, Simon JH, Maze BB. A comparison of the effect of modified and nonmodified instrument tips on apical canal configuration. J Endod 12:293-300. 1986.Article PubMed
14. Kuhn WG, Carnes DL Jr, Clement DJ, Walker WA 3rd. Effect of tip design of nickel-titanium and stainless steel files on root canal preparation. J Endod 23:735-738. 1997.Article PubMed
15. Kosa DA, Marshall G, Baumgartner JC. An analysis of canal centering using mechanical instrumentation techniques. J Endod 25:441-445. 1999.Article PubMed
16. Camps JJ, Pertot WJ. Torsional and stiffness properties of nickel-titanium K files. Int Endod J 28:239-243. 1995.PubMed
17. Haikel Y, Gasser P, Allemann C. Dynamic fracture of hybrid endodontic hand instruments compared with traditional files. J Endod 17:217-220. 1991.Article PubMed
18. Wildey WL, Senia ES, Montgomery S. Another look at root canal instrumentation. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol 74:499-507. 1992.Article PubMed
19. Bahcall JK, Barss JT. Understanding and evaluating the endodontic file. Gen Dent 48:690-692. 2000.PubMed
20. Averbach RE, Kleier DJ. Endodontics in the 21st century: the rotary revolution. Compend Contin Educ Dent 22:27-34. 2001.
21. 박 한수. 만곡 근관에서 근첨 형성 크기에 따른 근관의 전이 정 도에 관한 연구. 대한치과보존학회지 26:200-205. 2001.
22. Schneider SW. A comparison of canal preparations in straight and curved root canals. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol 32:271-275. 1971.Article PubMed
23. Vulcain JM, Calas P. The three wave concept of Hero 642. Endod Prac 2:20-31. 1999.
24. Bryant ST, Dummer PM, Pitoni C, Bourba M, Moghal S. Shaping ability of.04 and.06 taper ProFile rotary nickel-titanium instruments in simulated root canals. Int Endod J 32:155-164. 1999.PubMed
25. Bergmans L, Van Cleynenbreugel J, Wevers M, Lambrechts P. Mechanical root canal preparation with NiTi rotary instruments: rationale, performance and safety. Status report for the American Journal of Dentistry. Am J Dent 14:324-333. 2001.PubMed
26. Buchanan LS. Curved root canals: treating the most common endodontic complexity. Dent Today 11:34-38. 1992.
27. Turpin YL, Chagneau F, Vulcain JM. Impact of two theoretical cross-sections on torsional and bending stresses of nickel-titanium root canal instrument models. J Endod 26:414-417. 2000.Article PubMed
28. Turpin YL, Chagneau F Bartier, Cathelineau G, Vulcain JM. Impact of torsional and bending inertia on root canal instruments. J Endod 27:333-336. 2001.PubMed
29. Powell SE, Wong PD, Simon JH. A comparison of the effect of modified and nonmodified instrument tips on apical canal configuration. Part II. J Endod 14:224-228. 1988.Article PubMed
30. Miserendino LJ, Moser JB, Heuer MA, Osetek EM. Cutting efficiency of endodontic instruments. Part 1: a quantitative comparison of the tip and fluted regions. J Endod 11:435-441. 1985.Article PubMed
31. Miserendino LJ, Moser JB, Heuer MA, Osetek EM. Cutting efficiency of endodontic instruments. Part II Analysis of tip design. J Endod 12:8-12. 1986.Article PubMed
32. Felt RA, Moser JB, Heuer MA. Flute design of endodontic instruments: its influence on cutting efficiency. J Endod 8(6):253-259. 1982.PubMed
33. Koch K, Brave D. The ultimate rotary file? Oral Health March 59-64. 2002.
34. Blum JY, Machtou P, Micallef JP. Location of contact areas on rotary Profile instruments in relationship to the forces developed during mechanical preparation on extracted teeth. Int Endod J 32:108-114. 1999.PubMed
35. Lim KC, Webber J. The validity of simulated root canals for the investigation of the prepared root canal shape. Int Endod J 18:240-246. 1985.Article PubMed
36. Schafer E. Shaping ability of Hero 642 rotary nickel-titanium instruments and stainless steel hand K-Flexofiles in simulated curved root canals. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 92:215-220. 2001.PubMed
37. Kum KY, Spangberg L, Cha BY, Il-Young J Msd, Seung-Jong L, Chan-Young L. Shaping ability of three ProFile rotary instrumentation techniques in simulated resin root canals. J Endod 26:719-723. 2000.Article PubMed
38. Thompson SA, Dummer PM. Shaping ability of Hero 642 rotary nickel-titanium instruments in simulated root canals: Part 2. Int Endod J 33:255-261. 2000.Article PubMed
39. Thompson SA, Dummer PM. Shaping ability of Hero 642 rotary nickel-titanium instruments in simulated root canals: Part 1. Int Endod J 33:248-255. 2000.Article PubMed

Tables & Figures

REFERENCES

Citations

Citations to this article as recorded by

ePub Link

Cite

CITE: export Copy Download Format; Close

Download Citation

Download a citation file in RIS format that can be imported by all major citation management software, including EndNote, ProCite, RefWorks, and Reference Manager.

Format:

RIS — For EndNote, ProCite, RefWorks, and most other reference management software
BibTeX — For JabRef, BibDesk, and other BibTeX-specific software

Include:

Citation for the content below
Citation and abstract for the content below

SHAPING ABILITY OF NICKEL-TITANIUMROTARY FILES

J Korean Acad Conserv Dent. 2004;29(1):44-50. Published online January 14, 2004

DOI: https://doi.org/10.5395/JKACD.2004.29.1.44

XML Download

Figure

SHAPING ABILITY OF NICKEL-TITANIUMROTARY FILES

Fig. 1. Superimposing images of pre- and postoperative blocks

Fig. 1.

SHAPING ABILITY OF NICKEL-TITANIUMROTARY FILES

Group	Numbers of resin block	File system
P	12	Profile(Dentsply, Maillefer, Ballaigues Switzerland)
H	12	Hero 642(Micromega, Besancon, France)
K	12	K3(SybronEndo, Glendora, Ca., USA)

File system	Rake angle	Radial land
Profile(Dentsply, Maillefer, Ballaigues, Switzerland)	slight negative	Yes
Hero 642(Micromega, Besancon, France)	slight positive	No
K3(SybronEndo, Glendora, Ca, USA)	slight positive	Yes

Sequence	File	Working length(mm)
1	#30-.06T	12mm
2	#25-.06T	14mm
3	#20-.06T	16mm
4	#20-.04T	Working length
5	#20-.06T	Working length
6	#25-.06T	Working length

Sample No.	Profile	Hero 642	K3
1	162	120	136
2	165	116	129
3	160	118	133
4	145	115	138
5	160	124	134
6	148	115	130
7	140	105	134
8	162	120	129
9	170	106	119
10	167	110	135
11	163	114	119
12	150	125	124
Mean(SD)	157.7(±9.1)	115.7(±6.3)	130.0(±6.4)

Distance from apex		1mm	2mm	3mm	4mm	5mm	6mm	7mm
Total canal width	Group P	0.237	0.312	0.378	0.402	0.465	0.506	0.573
		(±0.030)	(±0.026)	(±0.032)	(±0.034)	(±0.015)	(±0.059)	(±0.020)
	Group H	0.272	0.419	0.518	0.518	0.532	0.597	0.652
		(±0.046)	(±0.075)	(±0.056)	(±0.037)	(±0.027)	(±0.029)	(±0.029)
	Group K	0.266	0.375	0.476	0.476	0.537	0.591	0.636
		(±0.058)	(±0.016)	(±0.020)	(±0.023)	(±0.028)	(±0.038)	(±0.038)
Outer canal width	Group P	0.146	0.215	0.265	0.263	0.253	0.230	0.259
		(±0.026)	(±0.034)	(±0.045)	(±0.035)	(±0.016)	(±0.040)	(±0.036)
	Group H	0.159	0.294	0.372	0.326	0.270	0.251	0.283
		(±0.038)	(±0.066)	(±0.052)	(±0.053)	(±0.025)	(±0.027)	(±0.030)
	Group K	0.153	0.252	0.303	0.298	0.268	0.246	0.280
		(±0.044)	(±0.032)	(±0.032)	(±0.024)	(±0.023)	(±0.026)	(±0.041)
Inner canal width	Group P	0.091	0.097	0.113	0.139	0.212	0.277	0.314
		(±0.005)	(±0.015)	(±0.021)	(±0.027)	(±0.022)	(±0.034)	(±0.035)
	Group H	0.114	0.125	0.146	0.192	0.262	0.346	0.370
		(±0.014)	(±0.020)	(±0.032)	(±0.036)	(±0.044)	(±0.042)	(±0.046)
	Group K	0.113	0.123	0.113	0.178	0.269	0.346	0.357
		(±0.021)	(±0.022)	(±0.029)	(±0.017)	(±0.027)	(±0.040)	(±0.051)
Amount of deviation	Group P	-0.025	-0.118	-0.152	-0.124	-0.041	0.047	0.055
		(±0.023)	(±0.046)	(±0.062)	(±0.052)	(±0.035)	(±0.046)	(±0.068)
	Group H	-0.045	-0.170	-0.227	-0.135	-0.008	0.095	0.087
		(±0.033)	(±0.063)	(±0.065)	(±0.083)	(±0.066)	(±0.065)	(±0.071)
	Group K	-0.040	-0.128	-0.171	-0.120	0.001	0.100	0.077
		(±0.037)	(±0.053)	(±0.058)	(±0.035)	(±0.041)	(±0.057)	(±0.084)

	Profile	Hero 642	K3
Rake angle	Negative	Positive	Positive
Radial land	Yes	No	Yes
Tip	Non-cutting	Non-cutting	Non-cutting
Helical flute angle	Consistent	Variable	Variable
Pitch	Consistent	Variable	Variable
Shank	Metal 15mm	Plastic 14mm	Metal 11.5mm

Table 1. Classification of groups

Table 2. Design of each files

Table 3. Preparation sequence

Table 4. Time for canal preparation(second)

Table 5. Mean values(standard deviation) of total canal width, outer canal width, inner canal width, and amount of deviation of each groups(mm)