Abstract
The aim was to compare the shaping ability of different rotary nickel–titanium instruments in simulated S-shaped canals. One hundred S-shaped canals in resin blocks were prepared to an apical size 25 using F6 SkyTaper (Komet), Silk Files .04, Silk Files .06, Prototypes .04, and Prototypes .06 (all Mani) (20 canals/group). Material removal was measured at 20 measuring points, beginning 1 mm from the endpoint of preparation. Incidence of canal aberrations, preparation time, and instrument failures were also recorded. Statistical analyses were performed using ANOVA, Student–Newman–Keuls and Chi-square test. Pooled data of all measuring points revealed that canals instrumented with Prototypes .04 were significantly better centered than those prepared with all other instruments, while Prototypes .06 and both Silk Files performed significantly better than F6 SkyTaper (p < 0.05). The preparation time differed significantly between all groups and Prototypes .04 allowed the fastest preparation (p < 0.05). There was no statistically significant association between type of instrument and incidence of aberrations (p > 0.05). The cross-sectional design had a marked impact on the shaping ability of the instruments, and less tapered instruments maintained the original canal curvature better than instruments having greater tapers.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Bürklein S, Schäfer E. Critical evaluation of root canal transportation by instrumentation. Endod Top. 2013;29:110–24.
Zupanc J, Vahdat-Pajouh N, Schäfer E. New thermomechanically treated NiTi alloys—a review. Int Endod J. 2018;51:1088–103.
Shen Y, Zhou HM, Zheng YF, Peng B, Haapasalo M. Current challenges and concepts of the thermomechanical treatment of nickel–titanium instruments. J Endod. 2013;39:163–72.
Schäfer E, Diez C, Hoppe W, Tepel J. Roentgenographic investigation of frequency and degree of canal curvatures in human permanent teeth. J Endod. 2002;28:211–6.
Keskin C, Sarıyılmaz E, Demiral M. Shaping ability of Reciproc Blue reciprocating instruments with or without glide path in simulated S-shaped root canals. J Dent Res Dent Clin Dent Prospects. 2018;12:63–7.
Yilmaz A, Kucukay ES, Istektepe M, Sisli SN, Ersev H, Karagoz-Kucukay I. Comparison of the shaping ability of WaveOne reciprocating files with or without glide path in simulated curved S-shaped root canals. J Int Soc Prev Commun Dent. 2017;7(Suppl 1):S13–7.
Özyürek T, Yılmaz K, Uslu G. Shaping ability of Reciproc, WaveOne GOLD, and HyFlex EDM Single-file systems in simulated S-shaped canals. J Endod. 2017;43:805–9.
Dioguardi M, Troiano G, Laino L, Lo Russo L, Giannatempo G, Lauritano F, Cicciù M, Lo Muzio L. ProTaper and WaveOne systems three-dimensional comparison of device parameters after the shaping technique. A micro-CT study on simulated root canals. Int J Clin Exp Med. 2015;8:17830–4.
Hiran-us S, Pimkhaokham S, Sawasdichai J, Ebihara A, Suda H. Shaping ability of ProTaper NEXT, ProTaper Universal and iRace files in simulated S-shaped canals. Aust Endod J. 2016;42:32–6.
Ceyhanli KT, Kamaci A, Taner M, Erdilek N, Celik D. Shaping ability of two M-wire and two traditional nickel–titanium instrumentation systems in S-shaped resin canals. Niger J Clin Pract. 2015;18:713–7.
Wu H, Peng C, Bai Y, Hu X, Wang L, Li C. Shaping ability of ProTaper Universal, WaveOne and ProTaper Next in simulated L-shaped and S-shaped root canals. BMC Oral Health. 2015;15:27. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12903-015-0012-z.
Bürklein S, Poschmann T, Schäfer E. Shaping ability of different NiTi systems in simulated S-shaped canals with and without glide path. J Endod. 2014;40:1231–4.
Alemam AAH, Dummer PMH, Farnell DJJ. A comparative study of ProTaper Universal and ProTaper Next used by undergraduate students to prepare root canals. J Endod. 2017;43:1364–9.
Shen LC, Gutmann JL. Management of a mandibular second molar with dilacerated and S-shaped root canals. ENDO (Lond Engl). 2016;10:225–9.
López-Ampudia N, Gutmann JL. Management of ‘S-shaped’ root canals—technique and case report. ENDO (Lond Engl). 2011;5:7–15.
Zhang EW, Cheung GS, Zheng YF. Influence of cross-sectional design and dimension on mechanical behavior of nickel-titanium instruments under torsion and bending: a numerical analysis. J Endod. 2010;36:1394–8.
Bürklein S, Mathey D, Schäfer E. Shaping ability of ProTaper NEXT and BT-RaCe nickel-titanium instruments in severely curved root canals. Int Endod J. 2015;48:774–81.
Kyaw Moe MM, Ha JH, Jin MU, Kim YK, Kim SK. Root canal shaping effect of instruments with offset mass of rotation in the mandibular first molar: a micro-computed tomographic study. J Endod. 2018;44:822–7.
Ha JH, Cheung GS, Versluis A, Lee CJ, Kwak SW, Kim HC. ‘Screw-in’ tendency of rotary nickel-titanium files due to design geometry. Int Endod J. 2015;48:666–72.
Pansheriya E, Goel M, Gupta KD, Ahuja R, Kaur RD, Garg V. Comparative evaluation of apical transportation and canal centric ability in apical region of newer nickel–titanium file systems using cone-beam computed tomography on extracted molars: an in vitro study. Contemp Clin Dent. 2018;9(Suppl 2):S215–20.
Bürklein S, Jäger PG, Schäfer E. Apical transportation and canal straightening with different continuously tapered rotary file systems in severely curved root canals: F6 SkyTaper and OneShape versus Mtwo. Int Endod J. 2017;50:983–90.
Bonaccorso A, Cantatore G, Condorelli GG, Schäfer E, Tripi TR. Shaping ability of four nickel–titanium rotary instruments in simulated S-shaped canals. J Endod. 2009;35:883–6.
Saleh AM, Vakili Gilani P, Tavanafar S, Schäfer E. Shaping ability of 4 different single-file systems in simulated S-shaped canals. J Endod. 2015;41:548–52.
Burroughs JR, Bergeron BE, Roberts MD, Hagan JL, Himel VT. Shaping ability of three nickel-titanium file systems in simulated S-shaped root canals. J Endod. 2012;38:1618–21.
Schäfer E, Dzepina A, Danesh G. Bending properties of rotary nickel–titanium instruments. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2003;96:757–63.
Yoshimine Y, Ono M, Akamine A. The shaping effects of three nickel-titanium rotary instruments in simulated S-shaped canals. J Endod. 2005;31:373–5.
Fukumori Y, Nishijyo M, Tokita D, Miyara K, Ebihara A, Okiji T. Comparative analysis of mechanical properties of differently tapered nickel titanium endodontic rotary instruments. Dent Mater J. 2018;37:667–74.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Donnermeyer, D., Viedenz, A., Schäfer, E. et al. Impact of new cross-sectional designs on the shaping ability of rotary NiTi instruments in S-shaped canals. Odontology 108, 174–179 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10266-019-00450-6
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10266-019-00450-6