ObjectivesThe purpose of this study was to compare the maximum screw-in forces generated during the movement of various Nickel-Titanium (NiTi) file systems.Materials and MethodsForty simulated canals in resin blocks were randomly divided into 4 groups for the following instruments: Mtwo size 25/0.07 (MTW, VDW GmbH), Reciproc R25 (RPR, VDW GmbH), ProTaper Universal F2 (PTU, Dentsply Maillefer), and ProTaper Next X2 (PTN, Dentsply Maillefer, n = 10). All the artificial canals were prepared to obtain a standardized lumen by using ProTaper Universal F1. Screw-in forces were measured using a custom-made experimental device (AEndoS-k, DMJ system) during instrumentation with each NiTi file system using the designated movement. The rotation speed was set at 350 rpm with an automatic 4 mm pecking motion at a speed of 1 mm/sec. The pecking depth was increased by 1 mm for each pecking motion until the file reach the working length. Forces were recorded during file movement, and the maximum force was extracted from the data. Maximum screw-in forces were analyzed by one-way ANOVA and Tukey's post hoc comparison at a significance level of 95%.ResultsReciproc and ProTaper Universal files generated the highest maximum screw-in forces among all the instruments while M-two and ProTaper Next showed the lowest (p < 0.05).ConclusionsGeometrical differences rather than shaping motion and alloys may affect the screw-in force during canal instrumentation. To reduce screw-in forces, the use of NiTi files with smaller cross-sectional area for higher flexibility is recommended.
Closure of interdental spaces using proximal build-ups with resin composite is considered to be practical and conservative. However, a comprehensive approach combining two or more treatment modalities may be needed to improve esthetics. This case report describes the management of a patient with multiple diastemas, a peg-shaped lateral incisor and midline deviation in the maxillary anterior area. Direct resin bonding along with orthodontic movement of teeth allows space closure and midline correction, consequently, creating a better esthetic result.
Objectives:The introduction of nickel-titanium alloy endodontic instruments has greatly simplified shaping the root canal systems. However, these new instruments have several unexpected disadvantages. One of these is tendency to screw into the canal. In this study, the influence of taper on the screw-in effect of the Ni-Ti rotary instrument were evaluated. Materials and Methods: A total of 20 simulated root canals with an S-shaped curvature in clear resin blocks were divided into two groups. ProFile .02, .04, .06 (Dentsply-Maillefer) and GT rotary files .08, .10, .12 (Dentsply) were used in Profile group, and K3 .04, .06, .08, .10, and .12 (SybronEndo, Glendora) were used in K3 group. Files were used with a single pecking motion at a constant speed of 300 rpm. A special device was made to measure the force of screw-in effect. A dynamometer of the device recorded the screwin force during simulated canal preparation and the recorded data was stored in computer with designed software. The data were subjected to one-way ANOVA and Tukey's multiple range test for post-hoc test. p value of less than 0.05 was regarded significant. Results: The more tapered instruments generated more screw-in forces in Profile group (p < 0.05). In K3 group, 0.08, 0.10. and 0.12 tapered instruments showed more screw-in force than 0.04 tapered one, and 0.08 and 0.12 tapered instruments showed more screw-in force than 0.06 tapered one (p < 0.05). Conclusions: The more tapered instruments seems to produce more screw-in force. To avoid this screw-in force during instrumentation, more attention may be needed when using more tapered instruments. [J Kor Acad Cons Dent 2010;35(5):380-386.]
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.