Stenman E, Spångberg L S
Faculty of Odontology, University of Umea, Sweden.
J Endod. 1990 Dec;16(12):575-9. doi: 10.1016/s0099-2399(07)80200-7.
Many root canal instruments with several different designs have been introduced during recent years. This article evaluates the machining properties of four such instruments: the Flex-R, K-Flex, Trio-Cut, and S file. There are large variations in the machining properties of these instruments. The results are comparable to findings when evaluating conventional root canal files which show that the Hedstrom file is much more efficient when considering removal of material than the K file. The Flex-R file, K-Flex file, and Trio-Cut file are similar in design. The two former brands perform in a similar fashion, while the Trio-Cut file is less efficient than any of the evaluated K files. The S file performs as a Hedstrom file which can be expected from its similarity in design to that instrument.
近年来，已经推出了许多具有几种不同设计的根管器械。本文评估了四种此类器械的加工性能：Flex-R、K-Flex、Trio-Cut和S锉。这些器械的加工性能存在很大差异。这些结果与评估传统根管锉时的发现相当，表明在考虑去除材料时，Hedstrom锉比K锉效率高得多。Flex-R锉、K-Flex锉和Trio-Cut锉在设计上相似。前两个品牌的表现类似，而Trio-Cut锉比任何一种评估的K锉效率都低。S锉的性能与Hedstrom锉相似，从其设计与该器械的相似性来看，这是可以预期的。
