Cargando…

File Breakage in Conventional Versus Contracted Endodontic Cavities

OBJECTIVE: To compare rotations to failure and tip separation length of a nickel-titanium (Ni-Ti) rotary instrument within a simulated mesio-buccal canal of a mandibular molar with a conventional or contracted endodontic cavity. METHODS: Two identical lithium disilicate #30 crowns were milled. A con...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Mauney Iii, Donald K., Versluis, Antheunis, Tantbirojn, Daranee, Cosby, Harry T., Phebus, Jeffrey G.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Kare Publishing 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10500211/
http://dx.doi.org/10.14744/eej.2023.41033
_version_ 1785105874302271488
author Mauney Iii, Donald K.
Versluis, Antheunis
Tantbirojn, Daranee
Cosby, Harry T.
Phebus, Jeffrey G.
author_facet Mauney Iii, Donald K.
Versluis, Antheunis
Tantbirojn, Daranee
Cosby, Harry T.
Phebus, Jeffrey G.
author_sort Mauney Iii, Donald K.
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVE: To compare rotations to failure and tip separation length of a nickel-titanium (Ni-Ti) rotary instrument within a simulated mesio-buccal canal of a mandibular molar with a conventional or contracted endodontic cavity. METHODS: Two identical lithium disilicate #30 crowns were milled. A conventional or contracted endodontic cavity was prepared. A custom glass tube was fabricated with taper and length replicating a mesio-buccal canal, including buccal and lingual curvature, and placed at the mesio-buccal orifice of each crown, held in a silicone mold. Instrumentation was simulated using 30/.04 Ni-Ti rotary files following manufacturer recommended 1.8 Nm torque and 500 RPM (n=20 per access type). Instrumentation was video recorded to determine time (seconds) and rotations to failure. The length of broken tips was measured. The experimental data were compared using a t-test (significance level 0.05). Stresses in the instruments were examined using finite element analysis. RESULTS: Number of rotations to failure (mean±standard deviation) was 599±126 for conventional and 465±65 and for contracted access; tip separation lengths (mean±standard deviation) were 3.99±0.29 for conventional and 4.90±1.02 mm for contracted access. Number of rotations to failure and tip separation lengths were significantly different between the two access openings (p<0.001). Finite element analysis confirmed higher file curvature and accompanying higher stress levels with contracted access and the maximum stress further from the tip. CONCLUSION: Within the limitations of this study, the contracted access caused earlier failure of the Ni-Ti instrument with longer tip separation lengths than the conventional access due to higher stresses towards the middle section of the instrument.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10500211
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher Kare Publishing
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-105002112023-09-15 File Breakage in Conventional Versus Contracted Endodontic Cavities Mauney Iii, Donald K. Versluis, Antheunis Tantbirojn, Daranee Cosby, Harry T. Phebus, Jeffrey G. Eur Endod J Original Article OBJECTIVE: To compare rotations to failure and tip separation length of a nickel-titanium (Ni-Ti) rotary instrument within a simulated mesio-buccal canal of a mandibular molar with a conventional or contracted endodontic cavity. METHODS: Two identical lithium disilicate #30 crowns were milled. A conventional or contracted endodontic cavity was prepared. A custom glass tube was fabricated with taper and length replicating a mesio-buccal canal, including buccal and lingual curvature, and placed at the mesio-buccal orifice of each crown, held in a silicone mold. Instrumentation was simulated using 30/.04 Ni-Ti rotary files following manufacturer recommended 1.8 Nm torque and 500 RPM (n=20 per access type). Instrumentation was video recorded to determine time (seconds) and rotations to failure. The length of broken tips was measured. The experimental data were compared using a t-test (significance level 0.05). Stresses in the instruments were examined using finite element analysis. RESULTS: Number of rotations to failure (mean±standard deviation) was 599±126 for conventional and 465±65 and for contracted access; tip separation lengths (mean±standard deviation) were 3.99±0.29 for conventional and 4.90±1.02 mm for contracted access. Number of rotations to failure and tip separation lengths were significantly different between the two access openings (p<0.001). Finite element analysis confirmed higher file curvature and accompanying higher stress levels with contracted access and the maximum stress further from the tip. CONCLUSION: Within the limitations of this study, the contracted access caused earlier failure of the Ni-Ti instrument with longer tip separation lengths than the conventional access due to higher stresses towards the middle section of the instrument. Kare Publishing 2023-07-25 /pmc/articles/PMC10500211/ http://dx.doi.org/10.14744/eej.2023.41033 Text en © Copyright 2023 by European Endodontic Journal https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License (CC BY-NC 4.0) (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/)
spellingShingle Original Article
Mauney Iii, Donald K.
Versluis, Antheunis
Tantbirojn, Daranee
Cosby, Harry T.
Phebus, Jeffrey G.
File Breakage in Conventional Versus Contracted Endodontic Cavities
title File Breakage in Conventional Versus Contracted Endodontic Cavities
title_full File Breakage in Conventional Versus Contracted Endodontic Cavities
title_fullStr File Breakage in Conventional Versus Contracted Endodontic Cavities
title_full_unstemmed File Breakage in Conventional Versus Contracted Endodontic Cavities
title_short File Breakage in Conventional Versus Contracted Endodontic Cavities
title_sort file breakage in conventional versus contracted endodontic cavities
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10500211/
http://dx.doi.org/10.14744/eej.2023.41033
work_keys_str_mv AT mauneyiiidonaldk filebreakageinconventionalversuscontractedendodonticcavities
AT versluisantheunis filebreakageinconventionalversuscontractedendodonticcavities
AT tantbirojndaranee filebreakageinconventionalversuscontractedendodonticcavities
AT cosbyharryt filebreakageinconventionalversuscontractedendodonticcavities
AT phebusjeffreyg filebreakageinconventionalversuscontractedendodonticcavities