Home > Journals > Minerva Dental and Oral Science > Past Issues > Articles online first > Minerva Dental and Oral Science 2021 Jun 15

CURRENT ISSUE
 

JOURNAL TOOLS

eTOC
To subscribe PROMO
Submit an article
Recommend to your librarian
 

ARTICLE TOOLS

Publication history
Reprints
Permissions
Cite this article as
Share

 

 

Minerva Dental and Oral Science 2021 Jun 15

DOI: 10.23736/S2724-6329.21.04465-X

Copyright © 2021 EDIZIONI MINERVA MEDICA

language: English

Cyclic fatigue and torsional resistance evaluation of Reciproc R25 instruments after simulated clinical use

Eugenio PEDULLÀ 1, Giusy R. LA ROSA 1 , Giovanni FRANCIOSI 2, Giacomo CORSENTINO 2, Silvia RAPISARDA 1, Fabio LO SAVIO 3, Guido LA ROSA 3, Simone GRANDINI 2

1 Department of General Surgery and Medical-Surgical Specialties, University of Catania, Catania, Italy; 2 Department of Endodontics and Restorative Dentistry, University of Siena, Siena, Italy; 3 Department of Industrial Engineering, University of Catania, Catania, Italy


PDF


BACKGROUND: To assess the influence of multiple uses on the cyclic flexural fatigue and torsional resistance of Reciproc R25 (REC) instruments.
METHODS: 256 canals (2 for each mandibular molar) were prepared using Reciproc R25 instruments. A total of 96 25-mm-long Reciproc R25 instruments were divided in six groups (n=8) on the basis of different number of canal shaped: new instruments (control group), 1, 2, 3, 4 or 6 canals shaped during simulated clinical use for other groups respectively. Sixteen files were used for each of the six groups (8 instruments for cyclic fatigue test and 8 ones for torsional test). Times to fracture (TtF) for cyclic fatigue and ultimate torsional strength and angle of rotation to fracture for torsional resistance were recorded. Data were statistically evaluated by the analysis of variance (ANOVA) with P<.05.
RESULTS: As for cyclic fatigue resistance, there was no significant difference between new REC and REC used in one, two and three canals respectively (P>.05). REC used in four and six canals showed significant lower times to fracture when compared with other groups (P<.05) with REC used in six canals showing the significant lowest times to fracture (P<.05). Considering torsional resistance parameters, no significant difference was observed between the new and used instruments (P>.05).
CONCLUSIONS: REC25 files showed a significant decrease in cyclic fatigue resistance only when used in four or more molar canals while their torsional behavior was not affected by multiple uses.


KEY WORDS: Cyclic fatigue; Multiple uses; Reciproc; Simulated clinical use; Torsional behaviour

top of page