File Download
  Links for fulltext
     (May Require Subscription)
Supplementary

Article: Cyclic fatigue and torsional resistance of two new nickel-titanium instruments used in reciprocation motion: Reciproc Versus WaveOne

TitleCyclic fatigue and torsional resistance of two new nickel-titanium instruments used in reciprocation motion: Reciproc Versus WaveOne
Authors
KeywordsCross-Section
Cyclic Fatigue Resistance
Nickel-Titanium Rotary File
Reciprocating
Torsional Resistance
Issue Date2012
PublisherElsevier Inc. The Journal's web site is located at http://www.jendodon.com
Citation
Journal of Endodontics, 2012, v. 38 n. 4, p. 541-544 How to Cite?
AbstractIntroduction: The use of reciprocating movement was claimed to increase the resistance of nickel-titanium (NiTi) file to fatigue in comparison with continuous rotation. Recently 2 new brands of NiTi files have been marketed for use in a RM mode. The purpose of this study was to compare the cyclic fatigue resistance and torsional resistance of these 2 files, Reciproc and WaveOne. Methods: Cyclic fatigue test with a simultaneous pecking motion was performed with the instrument (n = 10 each) operating in the recommended reciprocation motion until fracture for the Reciproc R25 and WaveOne Primary files. ProTaper F2 was tested in continuous rotation to serve as a control for comparison. The number of cycles to fracture (NCF) was determined by measuring the time to fracture. The length of the fragment was measured and the fracture surface was examined by using scanning electron microscopy. Torsional strength was measured by using a torsiometer after fixing the apical 5 mm of the instrument rigidly. Statistical analysis was performed by using one-way analysis of variance. Results: The results showed that Reciproc had a higher NCF and WaveOne had a higher torsional resistance than the others. Both reciprocating files demonstrated significantly higher cyclic fatigue and torsional resistances than ProTaper (P <.05). The fractographic analysis showed typical features of cyclic fatigue and torsional failure for all instruments. Conclusions: The 2 brands of NiTi file for use with a reciprocation motion seem to have superior mechanical properties. © 2012 American Association of Endodontists.
Persistent Identifierhttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/154707
ISSN
2015 Impact Factor: 2.904
2015 SCImago Journal Rankings: 1.681
ISI Accession Number ID
References

 

DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorKim, HCen_US
dc.contributor.authorKwak, SWen_US
dc.contributor.authorCheung, GSPen_US
dc.contributor.authorKo, DHen_US
dc.contributor.authorChung, SMen_US
dc.contributor.authorLee, Wen_US
dc.date.accessioned2012-08-08T08:27:02Z-
dc.date.available2012-08-08T08:27:02Z-
dc.date.issued2012en_US
dc.identifier.citationJournal of Endodontics, 2012, v. 38 n. 4, p. 541-544en_US
dc.identifier.issn0099-2399en_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/154707-
dc.description.abstractIntroduction: The use of reciprocating movement was claimed to increase the resistance of nickel-titanium (NiTi) file to fatigue in comparison with continuous rotation. Recently 2 new brands of NiTi files have been marketed for use in a RM mode. The purpose of this study was to compare the cyclic fatigue resistance and torsional resistance of these 2 files, Reciproc and WaveOne. Methods: Cyclic fatigue test with a simultaneous pecking motion was performed with the instrument (n = 10 each) operating in the recommended reciprocation motion until fracture for the Reciproc R25 and WaveOne Primary files. ProTaper F2 was tested in continuous rotation to serve as a control for comparison. The number of cycles to fracture (NCF) was determined by measuring the time to fracture. The length of the fragment was measured and the fracture surface was examined by using scanning electron microscopy. Torsional strength was measured by using a torsiometer after fixing the apical 5 mm of the instrument rigidly. Statistical analysis was performed by using one-way analysis of variance. Results: The results showed that Reciproc had a higher NCF and WaveOne had a higher torsional resistance than the others. Both reciprocating files demonstrated significantly higher cyclic fatigue and torsional resistances than ProTaper (P <.05). The fractographic analysis showed typical features of cyclic fatigue and torsional failure for all instruments. Conclusions: The 2 brands of NiTi file for use with a reciprocation motion seem to have superior mechanical properties. © 2012 American Association of Endodontists.en_US
dc.languageengen_US
dc.publisherElsevier Inc. The Journal's web site is located at http://www.jendodon.comen_US
dc.relation.ispartofJournal of Endodonticsen_US
dc.rightsNOTICE: this is the author’s version of a work that was accepted for publication in Journal of Endodontics. Changes resulting from the publishing process, such as peer review, editing, corrections, structural formatting, and other quality control mechanisms may not be reflected in this document. Changes may have been made to this work since it was submitted for publication. A definitive version was subsequently published in Journal of Endodontics, 2012, v. 38 n. 4, p. 541-544. DOI: 10.1016/j.joen.2011.11.014-
dc.rightsCreative Commons: Attribution 3.0 Hong Kong License-
dc.subjectCross-Sectionen_US
dc.subjectCyclic Fatigue Resistanceen_US
dc.subjectNickel-Titanium Rotary Fileen_US
dc.subjectReciprocatingen_US
dc.subjectTorsional Resistanceen_US
dc.titleCyclic fatigue and torsional resistance of two new nickel-titanium instruments used in reciprocation motion: Reciproc Versus WaveOneen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.identifier.emailCheung, GSP:spcheung@hkucc.hku.hken_US
dc.identifier.emailLee, W: jimin525@snu.ac.kr-
dc.identifier.authorityCheung, GSP=rp00016en_US
dc.description.naturepostprinten_US
dc.identifier.doi10.1016/j.joen.2011.11.014en_US
dc.identifier.pmid22414846-
dc.identifier.scopuseid_2-s2.0-84858334668en_US
dc.identifier.hkuros211618-
dc.relation.referenceshttp://www.scopus.com/mlt/select.url?eid=2-s2.0-84858334668&selection=ref&src=s&origin=recordpageen_US
dc.identifier.volume38en_US
dc.identifier.issue4en_US
dc.identifier.spage541en_US
dc.identifier.epage544en_US
dc.identifier.isiWOS:000302926200027-
dc.publisher.placeUnited Statesen_US
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridKim, HC=35746710200en_US
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridKwak, SW=54787794900en_US
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridCheung, GSP=7005809531en_US
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridKo, DH=46761173200en_US
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridChung, SM=54787454400en_US
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridLee, W=55099146600en_US

Export via OAI-PMH Interface in XML Formats


OR


Export to Other Non-XML Formats