| Literature DB >> 32019522 |
Amr M Elnaghy1, Shaymaa E Elsaka2,3, Ayman O Mandorah4.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to compare the cyclic fatigue resistance of newly developed TruNatomy instruments (TRN) in single and double (S-shaped) curvature canals with HyFlex CM (HCM), Vortex Blue (VB) and RaCe (RC) instruments.Entities:
Keywords: Cyclic fatigue; Double curvature; Heat-treated alloy; TruNatomy; Weibull analysis
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32019522 PMCID: PMC7001210 DOI: 10.1186/s12903-020-1027-7
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Oral Health ISSN: 1472-6831 Impact factor: 2.757
Fig. 1Schematic illustration of cyclic fatigue testing device. The instruments were immersed in saline during testing at 37 ± 1 °C. The handpiece was held by a jig during testing
Mean ± standard deviations, median of number of cycles to failure (NCF), and length (mm) of fractured fragments (FL) of tested instruments
| Groups | Single curvature | Double curvature | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apical curvature | Coronal curvature | ||||||||
| NCF | FL | NCF | FL | NCF | FL | ||||
| Mean ± SD | Median | Mean ± SD | Mean ± SD | Median | Mean ± SD | Mean ± SD | Median | Mean ± SD | |
| TRN | |||||||||
| 20/.04 | 1327.4 ± 100.7A | 1317 | 5.17 ± 0.14 | 619.2 ± 52.3A | 629 | 2.12 ± 0.07 | 719.6 ± 79.4A | 716 | 5.07 ± 0.15 |
| 26/.04 | 1238.8 ± 106.7a | 1277 | 5.17 ± 0.13 | 532.8 ± 51.9a | 523 | 2.12 ± 0.06 | 609.2 ± 46.5a | 614 | 5.05 ± 0.14 |
| HCM | |||||||||
| 20/.04 | 1388.1 ± 101.9A | 1362 | 5.15 ± 0.11 | 623.9 ± 57.4A | 629 | 2.11 ± 0.09 | 737.8 ± 73.1A | 715 | 5.08 ± 0.19 |
| 25/.04 | 1296.3 ± 80.3a | 1265 | 5.18 ± 0.18 | 542.6 ± 52.4a | 544 | 2.13 ± 0.17 | 618.6 ± 51.4a | 621 | 5.07 ± 0.19 |
| VB | |||||||||
| 20/.04 | 704.3 ± 55.1B | 712 | 5.14 ± 0.21 | 447.3 ± 71.7B | 430 | 2.16 ± 0.11 | 540.4 ± 55.3B | 549 | 5.04 ± 0.25 |
| 25/.04 | 529.5 ± 56.8b | 516 | 5.16 ± 0.21 | 290.2 ± 33.5b | 290 | 2.15 ± 0.17 | 358.4 ± 44.1b | 351 | 5.08 ± 0.22 |
| RC | |||||||||
| 20/.04 | 232.3 ± 29.5C | 230 | 5.13 ± 0.07 | 122.5 ± 20.7C | 125 | 2.13 ± 0.17 | 140.1 ± 21.1C | 140 | 5.04 ± 0.15 |
| 25/.04 | 215.9 ± 22.4c | 215 | 5.14 ± 0.08 | 93.1 ± 12.1c | 95 | 2.14 ± 0.17 | 127.7 ± 15.1c | 126 | 5.03 ± 0.18 |
Different superscript uppercase letter (column) for instrument size 20/.04 and lowercase letter (column) for sizes 25/.04 and 26/.04 indicate statistically significant difference (P < 0.05)
Fig. 2SEM images (× 200) of fractured fragments in double curvature canals. Fracture of instruments in apical curvature (a-d) and coronal curvature (e-h). (a, e) TRN, (b, f) HCM, (c, g) VB and (d, h) RC; respectively. The following features could be observed: the origin of the crack (arrow), fatigue zone (f), and overload fast fracture zone (o)
Weibull analysis of tested instruments
| Groups | Single curvature | Double curvature | ||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apical curvature | Coronal curvature | |||||||||||
| Weibull modulus (m) | Correlation coefficient (R2) | Characteristic strength (σ0) | Predicted cycles for 99% survival | Weibull modulus (m) | Correlation coefficient (R2) | Characteristic strength (σ0) | Predicted cycles for 99% survival | Weibull modulus (m) | Correlation coefficient (R2) | Characteristic strength (σ0) | Predicted cycles for 99% survival | |
| TRN | ||||||||||||
| 20/.04 | 14.7 | 0.92 | 1375 | 1005 | 12.8 | 0.96 | 644 | 449 | 15.2 | 0.97 | 755 | 484 |
| 26/.04 | 11.7 | 0.84 | 1293 | 874 | 11.8 | 0.94 | 556 | 377 | 10.3 | 0.93 | 630 | 466 |
| HCM | ||||||||||||
| 20/.04 | 16.6 | 0.91 | 1434 | 1069 | 12.6 | 0.98 | 649 | 450 | 13.9 | 0.96 | 771 | 514 |
| 25/.04 | 15.7 | 0.82 | 1338 | 1014 | 11.9 | 0.97 | 566 | 385 | 11.3 | 0.91 | 642 | 461 |
| VB | ||||||||||||
| 20/.04 | 14.8 | 0.93 | 729 | 535 | 9.9 | 0.94 | 477 | 253 | 10.9 | 0.97 | 565 | 371 |
| 25/.04 | 10.5 | 0.81 | 555 | 359 | 7.2 | 0.92 | 305 | 192 | 9.5 | 0.91 | 377 | 232 |
| RC | ||||||||||||
| 20/.04 | 11.1 | 0.96 | 245 | 149 | 8.9 | 0.93 | 131 | 66 | 9.9 | 0.93 | 149 | 84 |
| 25/.04 | 9.1 | 0.93 | 226 | 147 | 6.7 | 0.91 | 98 | 59 | 7.7 | 0.88 | 134 | 82 |
Fig. 3Survival probability plots for TRN, HCM, VB and RC instruments in single and double curvature canals. (a-c) Instruments with size 20/.04 taper for single, double apical and double coronal curvatures; respectively. (d-f) Instruments with size 25/.04 taper for single, double apical and double coronal curvatures; respectively