Advertisement

Clinical Oral Investigations

, Volume 23, Issue 2, pp 617–621 | Cite as

The impact of using a pneumatic contra-angle device on the lifespan of M-Wire- and Blue-treated instruments

  • Emmanuel João Nogueira Leal SilvaEmail author
  • Victor Talarico Leal Vieira
  • Tanize Theresinha Gonçalves Gabina
  • Henrique dos Santos Antunes
  • Hélio Pereira Lopes
  • Gustavo De-Deus
Original Article

Abstract

Objectives

To evaluate the cyclic fatigue resistance of Reciproc M-Wire R25 (VDW, Munich, Germany) and Reciproc R25 Blue instruments (VDW) driven by Direct® (VDW) contra-angle connected to an ordinary an air-driven motor or an electric motor and compare the results with those obtained by the Reciproc M-Wire R25 or Reciproc Blue R25 instruments driven by an electric torque-controlled motor using “RECIPROC ALL” preset program.

Materials and methods

Thirty Reciproc M-Wire R25 (25/0.08v) and 30 Reciproc Blue R25 (25/0.08v) instruments were used. Cyclic fatigue resistance was tested measuring the time to fracture and the number of cycles to fracture in an artificial stainless-steel canal with a 60° angle and a 5-mm radius of curvature. The Reciproc M-Wire and Reciproc Blue instruments were activated with a 6:1 reduction handpiece powered by a torque-controlled motor using “RECIPROC ALL” preset program, with Reciproc Direct® contra-angle powered by an ordinary air-driven motor or with Direct® contra-angle powered by an electric motor (n = 10). The fracture surface of all fragments was examined with a scanning electron microscope. The results were statistically analyzed using Student’s t test and one-way ANOVA at a significance level of P < 0.05.

Results

Cyclic fatigue life and number of cycles to fracture were significantly higher for Reciproc Blue instruments than for Reciproc M-Wire instruments regardless of the activation mode (P < 0.05). Instruments driven by Direct® contra-angle powered by an electric or by an ordinary air-driven motor revealed significantly longer cyclic fatigue life and number of cycles to fracture than instruments driven by an electric torque-controlled motor using “RECIPROC ALL” preset program (P < 0.05).

Conclusions

Reciproc Blue instruments showed improved performance regarding fatigue resistance when compared to Reciproc M-Wire instruments. Instruments driven by Reciproc Direct® contra-angle showed higher cyclic fatigue life and number of cycles to fracture than instruments driven by an electric torque-controlled motor.

Clinical relevance

Recently, Reciproc Direct®, the world’s first contra-angle handpiece with integrated reciprocating motion, has been launched in endodontic market. The present study showed improved cyclic fatigue life of endodontic instruments when activated by Reciproc Direct®.

Keywords

Cyclic fatigue Reciprocating instruments Reciproc Reciproc direct 

Notes

Funding

This study was partially funded by FAPERJ and CNPq.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Informed consent

For this type of study, formal consent is not required.

References

  1. 1.
    McGuigan MB, Louca C, Duncan HF (2013, 2014) Endodontic instrument fracture: causes and prevention. Br Dent J:341–348Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Yared G (2008) Canal preparation using only one NiTi rotary instrument: preliminary observations. Int Endod J 41:339–344CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Grande NM, Ahmed HM, Cohen S, Bukiet F, Plotino G (2015) Current assessment of reciprocation in endodontic preparation: a comprehensive review––part I: historic perspectives and current applications. J Endod 41:1778–1783CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Plotino G, Ahmed HM, Grande NM, Cohen S, Bukiet F (2015) Current assessment of reciprocation in endodontic preparation: a comprehensive review––part II: properties and effectiveness. J Endod 41:1939–1950CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Pedullà E, Lo Savio F, Boninelli S, Plotino G, Grande NM, la Rosa G, Rapisarda E (2016) Torsional and cyclic fatigue resistance of a new nickel-titanium instrument manufactured by electrical discharge machining. J Endod 42:156–159CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    De-Deus G, Silva EJ, Vieira VT et al (2017) Blue thermomechanical treatment optimizes fatigue resistance and flexibility of the Reciproc files. J Endod 43:462–466CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Silva EJ, Villarino LS, Vieira VT et al (2016) Bending resistance and cyclic fatigue life of Reciproc, Unicone, and WaveOne reciprocating instruments. J Endod 42:1789–1793CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Rodrigues RC, Lopes HP, Elias CN, Amaral G, Vieira VT, De Martin AS (2011) Influence of different manufacturing methods on the cyclic fatigue of rotary nickel-titanium endodontic instruments. J Endod 37:1553–1557CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    De-Deus G, Vieira VT, Silva EJ, Lopes H, Elias CN, Moreira EJ (2014) Bending resistance and dynamic and static cyclic fatigue life of Reciproc and WaveOne large instruments. J Endod 40:575–579CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Keskin C, Inan U, Demiral M, Keles A (2017) Cyclic fatigue resistance of Reciproc Blue, Reciproc, and WaveOne Gold reciprocating instruments. J Endod 43:1360–1363CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Plotino G, Grande NM, Cotti E, Testarelli L, Gambarini G (2014) Blue treatment enhances cyclic fatigue resistance of vortex nickel-titanium rotary files. J Endod 40:1451–1453CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Pedullà E, Plotino G, Grande NM, Scibilia M, Pappalardo A, Malagnino VA, Rapisarda E (2014) Influence of rotational speed on the cyclic fatigue of Mtwo instruments. Int Endod J 47:514–519CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Lopes HP, Ferreira AA, Elias CN, Moreira EJ, de Oliveira JC, Siqueira JF Jr (2009) Influence of rotational speed on the cyclic fatigue of rotary nickel-titanium endodontic instruments. J Endod 35:1013–1016CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    De-Deus G, Moreira EJ, Lopes HP, Elias CN (2010) Extended cyclic fatigue life of F2 ProTaper instruments used in reciprocating movement. Int Endod J 43:1063–1068CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Gambarini G, Rubini AG, Al Sudani D et al (2012) Influence of different angles of reciprocation on the cyclic fatigue of nickel-titanium endodontic instruments. J Endod 38:1408–1411CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Fidler A (2014) Kinematics of 2 reciprocating endodontic motors: the difference between actual and set values. J Endod 40:990–994CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Irmak Ö, Orhan EO (2018) Kinematic analysis of new and used reciprocating endodontic motors in 2 different modes. Int J Artif Organs 41:17–22CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Emmanuel João Nogueira Leal Silva
    • 1
    • 2
    Email author
  • Victor Talarico Leal Vieira
    • 1
  • Tanize Theresinha Gonçalves Gabina
    • 1
  • Henrique dos Santos Antunes
    • 1
  • Hélio Pereira Lopes
    • 3
  • Gustavo De-Deus
    • 4
  1. 1.Department of Endodontics, School of DentistryGrande Rio University (UNIGRANRIO)Rio de JaneiroBrazil
  2. 2.Endodontics Department, Dental SchoolGrande Rio University – UNIGRANRIONiteróiBrazil
  3. 3.Military Institute of Enginering (IME)Rio de JaneiroBrazil
  4. 4.Department of EndodonticsFluminense Federal University (UFF)NiteróiBrazil

Personalised recommendations