1. Weine FS, Kelly RF, Lio PJ. The effect of preparation procedures on original canal shape and on apical foramen shape. J Endod. 1:255–262. 1975.
Article
2. Schilder H. Cleaning and shaping the root canal. Dent Clin North Am. 18:269–296. 1974.
3. Coleman CL, Svec TA. Analysis of Ni-Ti versus stainless steel instrumentation in resin simulated canals. J Endod. 23:232–235. 1997.
Article
4. 박 한수, 이 민구, 김 종진, 임 영준, 장 문성, 이 종엽. ‘Three file’ 방식에 의한 만곡 근관 형성시 근관의 형태에 관한 연구. 대한 치과보존학회지. 25:494–498. 2000.
5. 박 한수, 백 승호. ‘Two file’방식에 의한 근관 형성시 근관의 형태에 관한 연구. 대한치과보존학회지. 26:507–511. 2001.
6. Walia HM, Brantley WA, Gerstein H. An initial investigation of the bending and torsional properties of Nitinol root canal files. J Endod. 14:346–551. 1988.
Article
7. Thompson SA. An overview of nickel-titanium alloys used in dentistry. Int Endod J. 33:297–310. 2000.
Article
8. Morgan LF, Montgomery S. An evaluation of the crown-down pressureless technique. J Endod. 10:491–498. 1984.
Article
9. Davis RD, Marshall JG, Baumgartner JC. Effect of early coronal flaring on working length change in curved canals using rotary nickel-titanium versus stainless steel instruments. J Endod. 28:438–442. 2002.
10. Buchanan LS. The standardized-taper root canal preparation–Part 1. Concepts for variably tapered shaping instruments. Int Endod J. 33:516–529. 2000.
11. Barrieshi-Nusair KM. Gutta-percha retreatment effectiveness of nickel-titanium rotary instruments versus stainless steel hand files. J Endod. 28:454–456. 2002.
12. Sattapan B, Nervo GJ, Palamara JE, Messer HH. Defects in rotary nickel-titanium files after clinical use. J Endod. 26:161–165. 2000.
Article
13. Powell SE, Simon JH, Maze BB. A comparison of the effect of modified and nonmodified instrument tips on apical canal configuration. J Endod. 12:293–300. 1986.
Article
14. Kuhn WG, Carnes DL Jr, Clement DJ, Walker WA 3rd. Effect of tip design of nickel-titanium and stainless steel files on root canal preparation. J Endod. 23:735–738. 1997.
Article
15. Kosa DA, Marshall G, Baumgartner JC. An analysis of canal centering using mechanical instrumentation techniques. J Endod. 25:441–445. 1999.
Article
16. Camps JJ, Pertot WJ. Torsional and stiffness properties of nickel-titanium K files. Int Endod J. 28:239–243. 1995.
Article
17. Haikel Y, Gasser P, Allemann C. Dynamic fracture of hybrid endodontic hand instruments compared with traditional files. J Endod. 17:217–220. 1991.
Article
18. Wildey WL, Senia ES, Montgomery S. Another look at root canal instrumentation. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol. 74:499–507. 1992.
Article
19. Bahcall JK, Barss JT. Understanding and evaluating the endodontic file. Gen Dent. 48:690–692. 2000.
20. Averbach RE, Kleier DJ. Endodontics in the 21st century: the rotary revolution. Compend Contin Educ Dent. 22:27–34. 2001.
21. 박 한수. 만곡 근관에서 근첨 형성 크기에 따른 근관의 전이 정 도에 관한 연구. 대한치과보존학회지. 26:200–205. 2001.
22. Schneider SW. A comparison of canal preparations in straight and curved root canals. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol. 32:271–275. 1971.
Article
23. Vulcain JM, Calas P. The three wave concept of Hero 642. Endod Prac. 2:20–31. 1999.
24. Bryant ST, Dummer PM, Pitoni C, Bourba M, Moghal S. Shaping ability of.04 and.06 taper ProFile rotary nickel-titanium instruments in simulated root canals. Int Endod J. 32:155–164. 1999.
25. Bergmans L, Van Cleynenbreugel J, Wevers M, Lambrechts P. Mechanical root canal preparation with NiTi rotary instruments: rationale, performance and safety. Status report for the American Journal of Dentistry. Am J Dent. 14:324–333. 2001.
26. Buchanan LS. Curved root canals: treating the most common endodontic complexity. Dent Today. 11:34–38. 1992.
27. Turpin YL, Chagneau F, Vulcain JM. Impact of two theoretical cross-sections on torsional and bending stresses of nickel-titanium root canal instrument models. J Endod. 26:414–417. 2000.
Article
28. Turpin YL, Chagneau F Bartier, Cathelineau G, Vulcain JM. Impact of torsional and bending inertia on root canal instruments. J Endod. 27:333–336. 2001.
Article
29. Powell SE, Wong PD, Simon JH. A comparison of the effect of modified and nonmodified instrument tips on apical canal configuration. Part II. J Endod. 14:224–228. 1988.
Article
30. Miserendino LJ, Moser JB, Heuer MA, Osetek EM. Cutting efficiency of endodontic instruments. Part 1: a quantitative comparison of the tip and fluted regions. J Endod. 11:435–441. 1985.
Article
31. Miserendino LJ, Moser JB, Heuer MA, Osetek EM. Cutting efficiency of endodontic instruments. Part II Analysis of tip design. J Endod. 12:8–12. 1986.
Article
32. Felt RA, Moser JB, Heuer MA. Flute design of endodontic instruments: its influence on cutting efficiency. J Endod. 8(6):253–259. 1982.
Article
33. Koch K, Brave D. The ultimate rotary file? Oral Health March. 59–64. 2002.
34. Blum JY, Machtou P, Micallef JP. Location of contact areas on rotary Profile instruments in relationship to the forces developed during mechanical preparation on extracted teeth. Int Endod J. 32:108–114. 1999.
Article
35. Lim KC, Webber J. The validity of simulated root canals for the investigation of the prepared root canal shape. Int Endod J. 18:240–246. 1985.
Article
36. Schafer E. Shaping ability of Hero 642 rotary nickel-titanium instruments and stainless steel hand K-Flexofiles in simulated curved root canals. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 92:215–220. 2001.
37. Kum KY, Spangberg L, Cha BY, Il-Young J Msd, Seung-Jong L, Chan-Young L. Shaping ability of three ProFile rotary instrumentation techniques in simulated resin root canals. J Endod. 26:719–723. 2000.
Article
38. Thompson SA, Dummer PM. Shaping ability of Hero 642 rotary nickel-titanium instruments in simulated root canals: Part 2. Int Endod J. 33:255–261. 2000.
Article
39. Thompson SA, Dummer PM. Shaping ability of Hero 642 rotary nickel-titanium instruments in simulated root canals: Part 1. Int Endod J. 33:248–255. 2000.
Article