Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

In vitro comparison of cyclic fatigue resistance of two rotary single-file endodontic systems: OneCurve versus OneShape

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Odontology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The aim of the present study was to evaluate the difference in cyclic fatigue resistance between OneCurve (OC) and OneShape (OS) endodontic single-file NiTi systems in a severely curved artificial canal. After sample size calculation (α = 0.01; β = 0.20; σ = 20.0; δ = 20.0), 25 OC and 25 OS files were used. An artificial canal with 60° angle and 5-mm radius of curvature was milled in a stainless-steel block reproducing the size and taper of the files used. The test device was electrically heated to maintain the environmental temperature at 37 °C. All files were rotated until fracture; the time to failure was recorded and the number of cycles to fracture (NCF) calculated. The length of the fractured fragments was measured too. Fractographic examination and cross-sectional area calculation were performed by scanning electron microscopy analysis (SEM). Data were statistically analyzed using an independent sample t test. The significance level was set at 0.01. Statistical analysis showed that OC files exhibited significantly greater cyclic fatigue resistance than OS (p < 0.001), with 721 ± 89 NCF and 301 ± 38 NCF, respectively. No significant difference was found in the length of the fractured fragments (p > 0.01). SEM fractographic analysis confirmed that all the scanned samples separated due to cyclic fatigue. Within the limitations of the present study, OC endodontic instruments resisted to cyclic fatigue better than OS. The improved mechanical resistance of OC could be related to new NiTi alloy used for their manufacturing.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Pedulla E, Lo Savio F, Boninelli S, et al. Torsional and cyclic fatigue resistance of a new nickel–titanium instrument manufactured by electrical discharge machining. J Endod. 2016;42:156–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Shen Y, Cheung GS, Peng B, Haapasalo M. Defects in nickel-titanium instruments after clinical use. Part 2: Fractographic analysis of fractured surface in a cohort study. J Endod. 2009;35:133–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Lopes HP, Chiesa WM, Correia NR, et al. Influence of curvature location along an artificial canal on cyclic fatigue of a rotary nickel–titanium endodontic instrument. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2011;111:792–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Testarelli L, Grande NM, Plotino G, et al. Cyclic fatigue of different nickel–titanium rotary instruments: a comparative study. Open Dent J. 2009;3:55–8.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  5. Alcalde MP, Tanomaru-Filho M, Bramante CM, et al. Cyclic and torsional fatigue resistance of reciprocating single files manufactured by different nickel–titanium alloys. J Endod. 2017;43:1186–91.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Gutmann JL, Gao Y. Alteration in the inherent metallic and surface properties of nickel–titanium root canal instruments to enhance performance, durability and safety: a focused review. Int Endod J. 2012;45:113–28.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Capar ID, Ertas H, Ok E, Arslan H, Ertas ET. Comparative study of different novel nickel–titanium rotary systems for root canal preparation in severely curved root canals. J Endod. 2014;40:852–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Berutti E, Chiandussi G, Paolino DS, et al. Canal shaping with WaveOne Primary reciprocating files and ProTaper system: a comparative study. J Endod. 2012;38:505–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Bürklein S, Hinschitza K, Dammaschke T, Schäfer E. Shaping ability and cleaning effectiveness of two single-file systems in severely curved root canals of extracted teeth: reciproc and WaveOne versus Mtwo and ProTaper. Int Endod J. 2012;45:449–61.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Elnaghy AM, Elsaka SE. Torsion and bending properties of OneShape and WaveOne instruments. J Endod. 2015;41:544–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Bürklein S, Jager PG, SchäferE. Apical transportation and canal straightening with different continuously tapered rotary file systems in severely curved root canals: F6 SkyTaper and OneShape versus Mtwo. Int Endod J. 2017;50:983–90.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Gambarini G, Grande NM, Plotino G, et al. Fatigue resistance of engine-driven rotary nickel–titanium instruments produced by new manufacturing methods. J Endod. 2008;34:1003–5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Lopes HP, Ferreira AA, Elias CN, Moreira EJ, de Oliveira JC, Siqueira JF Jr. Influence of rotational speed on the cyclic fatigue of rotary nickel–titanium endodontic instruments. J Endod. 2009;35:1013–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Dietz DB, Di Fiore PM, Bahcall JK, Lautenschlager EP. Effect of rotational speed on the breakage of nickel–titanium rotary files. J Endod. 2000;26:68–71.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Plotino G, Grande NM, Cordaro M, Testarelli L, Gambarini G. A review of cyclic fatigue testing of nickel–titanium rotary instruments. J Endod. 2009;35:1469–76.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Larsen CM, Watanabe I, Glickman GN, He J. Cyclic fatigue analysis of a new generation of nickel titanium rotary instruments. J Endod. 2009;35:401–3.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Dagna A, Poggio C, Beltrami R, Colombo M, Chiesa M, Bianchi S. Cyclic fatigue resistance of OneShape, Reciproc, and WaveOne: an in vitro comparative study. J Conserv Dent. 2014;17:250–4.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  19. Elsaka SE, Elnaghy AM. Cyclic fatigue resistance of OneShape and WaveOne instruments using different angles of curvature. Dent Mater J. 2015;34:358–63.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Gundogar M, Ozyurek T. Cyclic fatigue resistance of OneShape, HyFlex EDM, WaveOne Gold, and Reciproc Blue nickel–titanium instruments. J Endod. 2017;43:1192–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Kaval ME, Capar ID, Ertas H, Sen BH. Comparative evaluation of cyclic fatigue resistance of four different nickel–titanium rotary files with different cross-sectional designs and alloy properties. Clin Oral Investig. 2017;21:1527–30.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Karataslioglu E, Aydin U, Yildirim C. Cyclic fatigue resistance of novel rotary files manufactured from different thermal treated nickel–titanium wires in artificial canals. Niger J Clin Pract. 2018;21:231–5.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Gao Y, Shotton V, Wilkinson K, Phillips G, Johnson WB. Effects of raw material and rotational speed on the cyclic fatigue of ProFile Vortex rotary instruments. J Endod. 2010;36:1205–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. 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;44:357–61.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Shen Y, Zhou HM, Zheng YF, Peng B, Haapasalo M. Current challenges and concepts of the thermomechanical treatment of nickel–titanium instruments. J Endod. 2013;39:163–72.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Ninan E, Berzins DW. Torsion and bending properties of shape memory and superelastic nickel–titanium rotary instruments. J Endod. 2013;39:101–4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Kramkowski TR, Bahcall J. An in vitro comparison of torsional stress and cyclic fatigue resistance of ProFile GT and ProFile GT Series X rotary nickel–titanium files. J Endod. 2009;35:404–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Grande NM, Plotino G, Pecci R, Bedini R, Malagnino VA, Somma F. Cyclic fatigue resistance and three-dimensional analysis of instruments from two nickel–titanium rotary systems. Int Endod J. 2006;39:755–63.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Cheung GS, Darvell BW. Low-cycle fatigue of NiTi rotary instruments of various cross-sectional shapes. Int Endod J. 2007;40:626–32.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Jamleh A, Yahata Y, Ebihara A, Atmeh AR, Bakhsh T, Suda H. Performance of NiTi endodontic instrument under different temperatures. Odontology. 2016;104:324–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Dosanjh A, Paurazas S, Askar M. The effect of temperature on cyclic fatigue of nickel–titanium rotary endodontic instruments. J Endod. 2017;43:823–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Shen Y, Huang X, Wang Z, Wei X, Haapasalo M. Low environmental temperature influences the fatigue resistance of nickel–titanium files. J Endod. 2018;44:626–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. de Vasconcelos RA, Murphy S, Carvalho CA, Govindjee RG, Govindjee S, Peters OA. Evidence for reduced fatigue resistance of contemporary rotary instruments exposed to body temperature. J Endod. 2016;42:782–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Plotino G, Grande NM, Mercade Bellido M, Testarelli L, Gambarini G. Influence of temperature on cyclic fatigue resistance of ProTaper Gold and ProTaper Universal rotary files. J Endod. 2017;43:200–2.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Grande NM, Plotino G, Silla E, et al. Environmental temperature drastically affects flexural fatigue resistance of nickel–titanium rotary files. J Endod. 2017;43:1157–60.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Pirani C, Iacono F, Generali L, et al. HyFlex EDM: superficial features, metallurgical analysis and fatigue resistance of innovative electro discharge machines NiTi rotary instruments. Int Endod J. 2016;49:483–93.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Private Practice, Samarate, MI, Italy

    Marco Serafin

  2. University of Trieste, Trieste, TS, Italy

    Matteo De Biasi & Daniele Angerame

  3. Private Practice, Rome, Italy

    Vittorio Franco

Authors
  1. Marco Serafin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Matteo De Biasi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Vittorio Franco
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Daniele Angerame
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Daniele Angerame.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Serafin, M., De Biasi, M., Franco, V. et al. In vitro comparison of cyclic fatigue resistance of two rotary single-file endodontic systems: OneCurve versus OneShape. Odontology 107, 196–201 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10266-018-0390-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10266-018-0390-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation