Shaping ability of NiTi rotary versus stainless steel hand instruments in simulated curved canals

Medicina Oral, Patologia Oral y Cirugia Bucal

Volumn 16, Issue 3, 2011, Pages 454-458

  Sadeghi, Shiva ^a  

^a GUILAN UNIVERSITY OF MEDICAL SCIENCES   (Iran)

Author keywords

Hand instruments; Root canal preparation; Rotary instruments

Indexed keywords

NICKEL; POLYESTER; RESIN; STAINLESS STEEL; TITANIUM;

ARTICLE; COMPARATIVE STUDY; COMPUTER PROGRAM; DENTISTRY; ENDODONTICS; HAND; IMAGE ANALYSIS; INSTRUMENT; MATERIALS; MEDICAL INSTRUMENTATION; TOOTH ROOT CANAL;

DENTAL INSTRUMENTS; EQUIPMENT DESIGN; MATERIALS TESTING; NICKEL; ROOT CANAL PREPARATION; STAINLESS STEEL; TITANIUM;

EID: 79957967449     PISSN: 16984447     EISSN: 16986946     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.4317/medoral.16.e454     Document Type: Article

References (16)

1. Glossen CR, Haller RH, Dove SB, del Rio CE. A comparison of root canal preparations using Ni-Ti hand, Ni-Ti engine-driven, and K-Flex endodontic instruments. J Endod. 1995;21:146-51.
2. Kum KY, Spängberg 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. 2000;26:719-23.
3. Schäfer E, Lohmann D. Effciency of rotary nickel-titanium Flex-Master instruments compared with stainless steel hand K-Flexofle--Part 1. Shaping ability in simulated curved canals. Int Endod J. 2002;35:505-13.
4. Schäfer E. Shaping ability of Hero 642 rotary nickel-titanium instruments and stainless steel hand K-Flexofles in simulated curved root canals. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2001;92:215-20.
5. Schäfer E, Erler M, Dammaschke T. Comparative study on the shaping ability and cleaning effciency of rotary Mtwo instruments. Part 1. Shaping ability in simulated curved canals. Int Endod J. 2006;39:196-202.
6. Bonaccorso A, Cantatore G, Condorelli GG, Schäfer E, Tripi TR. Shaping ability of four nickel-titanium rotary instruments in simulated S-shaped canals. J Endod. 2009;35:883-6.
7. Peters OA. Current challenges and concepts in the preparation of root canal systems: a review. J Endod. 2004;30:559-67.
8. Schäfer E, Tepel J, Hoppe W. Properties of endodontic hand in- struments used in rotary motion. Part 2. Instrumentation of curved canals. J Endod. 1995;21:493-7.
9. Bergmans L, Van Cleynenbreugel J, Beullens M, Wevers M, Van Meerbeek B, Lambrechts P. Progressive versus constant tapered shaft design using NiTi rotary instruments. Int Endod J. 2003;36:288-95.
10. Lentine FN. A study of torsional and angular defection of endo-dontic fles and reamers. J Endod. 1979;5:181-91.
11. Weine FS, Kelly RF, Lio PJ. The effect of preparation procedures on original canal shape and on apical foramen shape. J Endod. 1975;1:255-62.
12. Lim KC, Webber J. The effect of root canal preparation on the shape of the curved root canal. Int Endod J. 1985;18:233-9.
13. Thompson SA, Dummer PM. Shaping ability of Hero 642 rotary nickel-titanium instruments in simulated root canals: Part 2. Int En-dod J. 2000;33:255-61.
14. Kosa DA, Marshall G, Baumgartner JC. An analysis of canal centering using mechanical instrumentation techniques. J Endod. 1999;25:441-5.
15. Esposito PT, Cunningham CJ. A comparison of canal preparation with nickel-titanium and stainless steel instruments. J Endod. 1995;21:173-6.
16. Martín-Micó M, Forner-Navarro L, Almenar-García A. Modi-fcation of the working length after rotary instrumentation: a comparative study of four systems. Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal. 2009;14:E153-7.