Lumley P J, Harrington E, Walmsley A D, Marquis P M
School of Dentistry, University of Birmingham, England.
Endod Dent Traumatol. 1996 Apr;12(2):77-81. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-9657.1996.tb00101.x.
The aims of this investigation were to measure the thickness and taper of the different files (Heliosonic 15-40. Shaper 15-40 and Rispisonic 1-6) supplied with the MM1500 sonic instrument and relate this to their stiffness. The diameter of the files (n = 5 for each file type) was measured at 2 mm intervals using light microscopy and a calibrated graticule (mag x 120). A model system was developed for the stiffness testing. The file was held 3 mm from its tip and the load in g required to produce a 45 degrees deflection of the file was recorded. Measurements of file diameter showed that the width of the Heliosonic and Shaper increased in a linear manner and that the file taper was the same for increasing file sizes in accordance with ISO recommendations. The Rispisonic files however showed differing widths and degrees of taper which were not consistent with ISO standards. The stiffness testing results showed the Heliosonic files to be less flexible than the Rispisonic and Shaper files for all sizes (ANOVA, p < 0.001). The differences in stiffness of the Heliosonic, Shaper and Rispisonic files were due to the variation in cross sectional area of metal. In conclusion sonic endodontic files do not have the same taper and stiffness.
