Nabavizadeh Mohammad Reza, Sedigh-Shams Mahdi, Abdolrasoulnia Sara
Oral and Dental Disease Research Center, Department of Endodontics, Dental School, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran.
Department of Endodontics, Dental School, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran.
Iran Endod J. 2018 Winter;13(1):61-65. doi: 10.22037/iej.v13i1.18037.
This study aimed to evaluate the cyclic fatigue resistance of two single file engine-driven instruments, Reciproc and NeoNiTi, in simulated root canals.
Two groups of 15 NiTi endodontic instruments with an identical tip size of 0.25 mm were tested: Reciproc R25 (group A) and NeoNiTi A1 (group B). Cyclic fatigue testing was performed in a stainless steel artificial canal. The simulated canals had a 60 angle and 5-mm radius curvature. The Reciproc instruments were operated using the preset program on torque control electric motor specific for the Reciproc instruments, while the NeoNiTi instruments were operated using the manufacturer recommendation. All instruments were rotated until fracture occurred, and the number of cycles to fracture (NCF) and the length of the fractured tip were recorded and registered. Means and standard deviations of NCF and fragment length were calculated for each system and data were subjected to Student's test (<0.05).
A statistically significant difference (<0.05) was noted between Reciproc and NeoNiTi instruments. NeoNiTi A1 instruments were associated with a significantly higher mean NCF as compared to Reciproc R25 instruments (833±176 318±87 NCF). There was no significant difference (>0.05) in the mean length of the fractured fragments between the instruments.
NeoNiTi instruments were associated with a significantly higher cyclic fatigue resistance than Reciproc instruments.
本研究旨在评估两种单支锉电动驱动器械Reciproc和NeoNiTi在模拟根管中的抗循环疲劳性能。
测试两组各15支尖端尺寸均为0.25 mm的镍钛根管器械：Reciproc R25（A组）和NeoNiTi A1（B组）。在不锈钢人工根管中进行循环疲劳测试。模拟根管有60°角和5 mm半径的弯曲度。Reciproc器械使用针对Reciproc器械的扭矩控制电动马达上的预设程序操作，而NeoNiTi器械按照制造商的建议操作。所有器械旋转直至发生折断，记录并登记折断时的循环次数（NCF）和折断尖端的长度。计算每个系统的NCF和碎片长度的均值及标准差，并对数据进行t检验（P<0.05）。
Reciproc和NeoNiTi器械之间存在统计学显著差异（P<0.05）。与Reciproc R25器械相比，NeoNiTi A1器械的平均NCF显著更高（833±176对318±87次循环）。器械之间折断碎片的平均长度无显著差异（P>0.05）。
NeoNiTi器械的抗循环疲劳性能显著高于Reciproc器械。
