Restor Dent Endod.  2017 May;42(2):134-139. 10.5395/rde.2017.42.2.134.

Cyclic fatigue life of Tango-Endo, WaveOne GOLD, and Reciproc NiTi instruments

• Yılmaz K
• Ozyürek T

• KMID: 2379463
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.5395/rde.2017.42.2.134

Abstract

OBJECTIVES
To compare the fatigue life of Tango-Endo, WaveOne GOLD, and Reciproc NiTi instruments under static model via artificial canals with different angles of curvature.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Reciproc R25, WaveOne GOLD Primary, and Tango-Endo instruments were included in this study (n = 20). All the instruments were rotated in artificial canals which were made of stainless steel with an inner diameter of 1.5 mm, 45°, 60°, and 90° angles of curvatures and a radius of curvature of 5 mm until fracture occurred, and the time to fracture was recorded in seconds using a digital chronometer. The data were analyzed using Kruskal-Wallis and post-hoc Dunn tests were used for the statistical analysis of data in SPSS 21.0 software.
RESULTS
Tango-Endo files were found to have significantly higher values than WaveOne GOLD and Reciproc files in terms of fatigue life (p < 0.05). However, there was no statistically significant difference between fatigue life of Reciproc and WaveOne GOLD files (p > 0.05). It was determined that increasing the angle of curvature of the stainless canals caused significant decreases in fatigue life of all of three files (p < 0.05).
CONCLUSIONS
Within the limitations of the present study, the cyclic fatigue life of Tango-Endo in canals having different angles of curvature was statistically higher than Reciproc and WaveOne GOLD.

Keyword

Cyclic Fatigue; Reciproc; Static Model; Tango-Endo; WaveOne GOLD

MeSH Terms

Fatigue*
Radius
Stainless Steel
Stainless Steel

Figure

• 

  Figure 1 Scanning electron microscopic appearances of the Tango-Endo, WaveOne GOLD, and Reciproc files after cyclic fatigue testing. (a, c, and e) General view of Tango-Endo, WaveOne GOLD, and Reciproc, respectively, (white arrows, showing fracture zone); (b, d, and f) High-magnification view of Tango-Endo, WaveOne GOLD, and Reciproc instruments showing typical fatigue striations of cyclic fatigue (white arrows, showing fatigue striations), respectively.

Reference

1. Walia HM, Brantley WA, Gerstein H. An initial investigation of the bending and torsional properties of Nitinol root canal files. J Endod. 1988; 14:346–351. PMID: 3251996.

2. Ankrum MT, Hartwell GR, Truitt JE. K3 Endo, ProTaper, and ProFile systems: breakage and distortion in severely curved roots of molars. J Endod. 2004; 30:234–237. PMID: 15085054.

3. Peters OA. Current challenges and concepts in the preparation of root canal systems: a review. J Endod. 2004; 30:559–567. PMID: 15273636.

4. Gergi R, Rjeily JA, Sader J, Naaman A. Comparison of canal transportation and centering ability of twisted files, Pathfile-ProTaper system, and stainless steel hand K-files by using computed tomography. J Endod. 2010; 36:904–907. PMID: 20416443.

5. Gambarini G. Cyclic fatigue of nickel-titanium rotary instruments after clinical use with low-and high-torque endodontic motors. J Endod. 2001; 27:772–774. PMID: 11771588.

6. Parashos P, Messer HH. Rotary NiTi instrument fracture and its consequences. J Endod. 2006; 32:1031–1043. PMID: 17055902.

7. Wan J, Rasimic BJ, Musikant BL, Deutsch AS. A comparison of cyclic fatigue resistance in reciprocating and rotary nickel-titanium instruments. Aust Endod J. 2011; 37:122–127. PMID: 22117719.

8. Lopes HP, Elias CN, Vieira VT, Moreira EJ, Marques RV, de Oliveira JC, Debelian G, Siqueria JF Jr. Effects of electropolishing surface treatment on the cyclic fatigue resistance of BioRace nickel-titanium rotary instruments. J Endod. 2010; 36:1653–1657. PMID: 20850671.

9. Sattapan B, Nervo GJ, Palamara JE, Messer HH. Defects in rotary nickel-titanium files after clinical use. J Endod. 2000; 26:161–165. PMID: 11199711.

10. Varela-Patiño P, Ibañez-Párraga A, Rivas-Mundiña B, Cantatore G, Otero XL, Martin-Biedma B. Alternating versus continuous rotation: a comparative study of the effect on instrument life. J Endod. 2010; 36:157–159. PMID: 20003957.

11. You SY, Bae KS, Baek SH, Kum KY, Shon WJ, Lee W. Lifespan of one nickel-titanium rotary file with reciprocating motion in curved root canals. J Endod. 2010; 36:1991–1994. PMID: 21092819.

12. De-Deus G, Moreira EJ, Lopes HP, Elias CN. Extended cyclic fatigue life of F2 ProTaper instruments used in reciprocating movement. Int Endod J. 2010; 43:1063–1068. PMID: 21080616.

13. Kim HC, Kwak SW, Cheung GS, Ko DH, Chung SM, Lee W. Cyclic fatigue and torsional resistance of two new nickel-titanium instruments used in reciprocation motion: Reciproc versus WaveOne. J Endod. 2012; 38:541–544. PMID: 22414846.

14. Tango-Endo brochure. updated 2017 Mar 3. Available from: http://www.edsdental.com/productpdfs/TangoProfile.pdf.

15. Arens FC, Hoen MM, Steiman HR, Dietz GC Jr. Evaluation of single-use rotary nickel-titanium instruments. J Endod. 2003; 29:664–666. PMID: 14606792.

16. Yared G. Canal preparation using only one Ni-Ti rotary instrument: preliminary observations. Int Endod J. 2008; 41:339–344. PMID: 18081803.

17. Cheung GS, Zhang EW, Zheng YF. A numerical method for predicting the bending fatigue life of NiTi and stainless steel root canal instruments. Int Endod J. 2011; 44:357–361. PMID: 21219364.

18. Plotino G, Grande NM, Cordaro M, Testarelli L, Gambarini G. A review of cyclic fatigue testing of nickel-titanium rotary instruments. J Endod. 2009; 35:1469–1476. PMID: 19840633.

19. Yao JH, Schwartz SA, Beeson TJ. Cyclic fatigue of three types of rotary nickel-titanium files in a dynamic model. J Endod. 2006; 32:55–57. PMID: 16410070.

20. Hülsmann M, Stryga F. Comparison of root canal preparation using different automated devices and hand instrumentation. J Endod. 1993; 19:141–145. PMID: 8509753.

21. Weine FS, Kelly RF, Bray KE. Effect of preparation with endodontic handpieces on original canal shape. J Endod. 1976; 2:298–303. PMID: 1068206.

22. WaveOne GOLD brochure. updated 2017 Mar 3. Available from: https://www.dentsply.com/content/dam/dentsply/pim/manufacturer/Endodontics/Obturation/Gutta_Percha_Points/WaveOne_Gold_Gutta_Percha_Points/W1G_Brochure_EN.pdf.

23. Topçuoğlu HS, Düzgün S, Aktı A, Topçuoğlu G. Laboratory comparison of cyclic fatigue resistance of WaveOne Gold, Reciproc and WaveOne files in canals with a double curvature. Int Endod J. 2016; 6. 25. [Epub ahead of print]. DOI: 10.1111/iej.12674.

24. Özyürek T. Cyclic fatigue resistance of Reciproc, WaveOne, and WaveOne Gold Nickel-Titanium instruments. J Endod. 2016; 42:1536–1539. PMID: 27520406.

25. Scelza P, Harry D, Silva LE, Barbosa IB, Scelza MZ. A comparison of two reciprocating instruments using bending stress and cyclic fatigue tests. Braz Oral Res. 2015; 29:1–7.

26. De-Deus G, Vieira VT, Nogueira da Silva EJ, Lopes H, Elias CN, Moreira EJ. Bending resistance and dynamic and static cyclic fatigue life of Reciproc and WaveOne large instruments. J Endod. 2014; 40:575–579. PMID: 24666915.

27. Pedullà E, Grande NM, Plotino G, Gambarini G, Rapisarda E. Influence of continuous or reciprocating motion on cyclic fatigue resistance of 4 different nickel-titanium rotary instruments. J Endod. 2013; 39:258–261. PMID: 23321241.

28. Arias A, Perez-Higueras JJ, de la Macorra JC. Differences in cyclic fatigue resistance at apical and coronal levels of Reciproc and WaveOne new files. J Endod. 2012; 38:1244–1248. PMID: 22892743.

29. Plotino G, Grande NM, Testarelli L, Gambarini G. Cyclic fatigue of Reciproc and WaveOne reciprocating instruments. Int Endod J. 2012; 45:614–618. PMID: 22268461.