Cyclic fatigue analysis of Reciproc R25® instruments with different kinematics.

This study aimed to compare the cyclic fatigue resistance of Reciproc® instruments when used with different kinematics (150° counterclockwise (CCW)-30° clockwise (CW), 270° CCW-30° CW, 360° CCW-30° CW and continuous rotation). Various kinematics were tested in steel canals with a 3 mm radius and a 60° angle of curvature as follows (n = 20): 150° CCW-30° CW, 270° CCW-30° CW, 360° CCW-30° CW and 360° CCW (rotary motion). Reciproc R25® instruments were used until fracture occurred.

Micro push-out bond strength of resin cement in roots exhibiting the butterfly effect.

The aim of this study was to determine the bond strength of resin cement in root sections with or without butterfly effect. Fifteen single-rooted human maxillary central incisors were decoronated and prepared up to size 40. After post space preparation, the resin cement was placed into the post space and the fiber posts were luted.

Evaluation of instrumentation systems in reducing E. faecalis from root canals: TF adaptive and ProTaper next versus single file systems.

Purpose: To compare the effect of the TF Adaptive, ProTaper Next, OneShape, WaveOne, Reciproc, (SAF) on the reduction of E. faecalis in experimentally infected root canals.

Materials And Methods: 70 human mandibular incisor teeth with straight roots and single root canals were selected for this experiment and the root canals of the selected teeth were infected with E.

Incidence of Dentinal Cracks after Root Canal Preparation with Twisted File Adaptive Instruments Using Different Kinematics.

Introduction: The purpose of the present study was to assess the effect of root canal instrumentation using Twisted File Adaptive instruments (Axis/SybronEndo, Orange, CA) with different kinematics (adaptive motion, 90° clockwise [CW]-30° counterclockwise [CCW], 150° CW-30° CCW, 210° CW-30° CCW, and continuous rotation) on crack formation.

Methods: One hundred five mandibular central incisor teeth were selected. Fifteen teeth were left unprepared (control group), and the remaining 90 teeth were assigned to the 5 root canal shaping groups as follows (n = 15): adaptive motion, 90° CW-30° CCW, 150° CW-30° CCW, 210° CW-30° CCW, continuous rotation, and hand file.