Evolution and development: engine-driven endodontic rotary nickel-titanium instruments

Abstract

Various engine-driven NiTi endodontic files have been indispensable and efficient tools in cleaning and shaping of root canals for practitioners. In this review, we introduce the relative terms and conceptions of NiTi file, including crystal phase composition, the design of the cutting part, types of separation. This review also analysis the main improvement and evolution of different generations of engine-driven nickel-titanium instruments in the past 20 years in the geometric design, manufacturing surface treatment such as electropolishing, thermal treatment, metallurgy. And the variety of motion modes of NiTi files to improve resistance to torsional failure were also discussed. Continuous advancements by the designers, provide better balance between shaping efficiency and resistance to of NiTi systems. In clinical practice an appropriate system should be selected based on the anatomy of the root canal, instrument characteristics, and operators’ experience.

References

[1] Andreasen GF, Hilleman TB. An evaluation of 55 cobalt substituted Nitinol wire for use in orthodontics. J. Am. Dent. Assoc., 1971, 82: 1373-1375.

[2] Civjan S, Huget EF, DeSimon LB. Potential applications of certain nickel-titanium (nitinol) alloys. J. Dent. Res., 1975, 54: 89-96.

[3] Walia HM, Brantley WA, Gerstein H. An initial investigation of the bending and torsional properties of Nitinol root canal files. J. Endod., 1988, 14: 346-351.

[4] Versluis A, Kim HC, Lee W, Kim BM, Lee CJ. Flexural stiffness and stresses in nickel-titanium rotary files for various pitch and cross-sectional geometries. J. Endod., 2012, 38: 1399-1403.

[5] Baek SH, . Comparison of torsional stiffness of nickel-titanium rotary files with different geometric characteristics. J. Endod., 2011, 37: 1283-1286.

[6] Turpin YL, Chagneau F, Vulcain JM. Impact of two theoretical cross-sections on torsional and bending stresses of nickel-titanium root canal instrument models. J. Endod., 2000, 26: 414-417.

[7] Xu X, Eng M, Zheng Y, Eng D. Comparative study of torsional and bending properties for six models of nickel-titanium root canal instruments with different cross-sections. J. Endod., 2006, 32: 372-375.

[8] Guppy DR, Curtis RV, Pitt Ford TR. Dentine chips produced by nickel-titanium rotary instruments. Dent. Traumatol., 2000, 16: 258-264.

[9] Koch K, Brave D. Real world endo: design features of rotary files and how they affect clinical performance. Oral. Health, 2002, 92: 39-49.

[10] Jeon IS, Spångberg LSW, Yoon TC, Kazemi RB, Kum KY. Smear layer production by 3 rotary reamers with different cutting blade designs in straight root canals: A scanning electron microscopic study. Oral. Surg. Oral. Med. Oral. Pathol. Oral. Radiol. Endod., 2003, 96: 601-607.

[11] Schäfer E, Vlassis M. Comparative investigation of two rotary nickel-titanium instruments: ProTaper versus RaCe. Part 2. Cleaning effectiveness and shaping ability in severely curved root canals of extracted teeth. Int. Endod. J., 2004, 37: 239-248.

[12] Khadivi Nia Javan N, Mohajeri Baradaran L, Azimi S. SEM Study of root canal walls cleanliness after Ni-Ti rotary and hand instrumentation. Iran. Endod. J., 2007, 2: 5-10.

[13] Yao JH, Schwartz SA, Beeson TJ. Cyclic fatigue of three types of rotary nickel-titanium files in a dynamic model. J. Endod., 2006, 32: 55-57.

[14] Javaheri HH, Javaheri GH. A comparison of three Ni-Ti rotary instruments in apical transportation. J. Endod., 2007, 33: 284-286.

[15] Pruett JP, Clement DJ, Carnes DL. Cyclic fatigue testing of nickel-titanium endodontic instruments. J. Endod., 1997, 23: 77-85.

[16] Sattapan B, Nervo GJ, Palamara JE, Messer HH. Defects in rotary nickel-titanium files after clinical use. J. Endod., 2000, 26: 161-165.

[17] Ha JH, Park SS. Influence of glide path on the screw-in effect and torque of nickel-titanium rotary files in simulated resin root canals. Restor. Dent. Endod., 2012, 37: 215-219.

[18] Ruddle CJ. The ProTaper technique. Endod. Top., 2005, 10: 187-190.

[19] Kim HC, . Mechanical response of nickel-titanium instruments with different cross-sectional designs during shaping of simulated curved canals. Int. Endod. J., 2009, 42: 593-602.

[20] Çapar ID, Ertas H, Arslan H. Comparison of cyclic fatigue resistance of novel nickel-titanium rotary instruments. Aust. Endod. J., 2015, 41: 24-28.

[21] Silva EJNL, . Quantitative transportation assessment in curved canals prepared with an off-centered rectangular design system. Braz. Oral. Res., 2016, 30: e43.

[22] Gavini G, . Nickel-titanium instruments in endodontics: a concise review of the state of the art. Braz. Oral. Res., 2018, 32: e67.

[23] Haapasalo M, Shen Y. Evolution of nickel-titanium instruments: from past to future. Endod. Top., 2013, 29: 3-17.

[24] Berutti E, . Canal shaping with waveone primary reciprocating files and protaper system: a comparative study. J. Endod., 2012, 38: 505-509.

[25] Kim HC, Yum J, Hur B, Cheung GSP. Cyclic fatigue and fracture characteristics of ground and twisted nickel-titanium rotary files. J. Endod., 2010, 36: 147-152.

[26] Özyürek T, . Cyclic fatigue resistances of Hyflex EDM, WaveOne gold, Reciproc blue and 2shape NiTi rotary files in different artificial canals. Odontology, 2018, 106: 408-413.

[27] Iacono F, . Structural analysis of HyFlex EDM instruments. Int. Endod. J., 2017, 50: 303-313.

[28] Thompson SA. An overview of nickel-titanium alloys used in dentistry. Int. Endod. J., 2000, 33: 297-310.

[29] Kishore A, . Comparison of canal transportation and centering ability of twisted files, HyFlex controlled memory, and wave one using computed tomography scan: an in vitro study. J. Conserv. Dent., 2017, 20: 161-165.

[30] Shen Y, . Fatigue resistance of a 3-dimensional conforming nickel-titanium rotary instrument in double curvatures. J. Endod., 2016, 42: 961-964.

[31] Plotino G, Grande NM, Cotti E, Testarelli L, Gambarini G. Blue treatment enhances cyclic fatigue resistance of vortex nickel-titanium rotary files. J. Endod., 2014, 40: 1451-1453.

[32] Chi CW, Lai EHH, Liu CY, Lin CP, Shin CS. Influence of heat treatment on cyclic fatigue and cutting efficiency of ProTaper Universal F2 instruments. J. Dent. Sci., 2017, 12: 21-26.

[33] Vasconcelos RA, Arias A, Peters OA. Lateral and axial cutting efficiency of instruments manufactured with conventional nickel-titanium and novel gold metallurgy. Int. Endod. J., 2018, 51: 577-583.

[34] Alves V, . Comparison among manual instruments and PathFile and Mtwo rotary instruments to create a glide path in the root canal preparation of curved canals. J. Endod., 2012, 38: 117-120.

[35] Roane JB, Sabala CL, Duncanson MG. The “balanced force” concept for instrumentation of curved canals. J. Endod., 1985, 11: 203-211.

[36] You SY, . Lifespan of one nickel-titanium rotary file with reciprocating motion in curved root canals. J. Endod., 2010, 36: 1991-1994.

[37] Varela-Patiño P, . Alternating versus Continuous Rotation: a comparative study of the effect on instrument life. J. Endod., 2010, 36: 157-159.

[38] Metzger Z, Teperovich E, Zary R, Cohen R, Hof R. The self-adjusting file (SAF). Part 1: respecting the root canal anatomy-a new concept of endodontic files and its implementation. J. Endod., 2010, 36: 679-690.

[39] Kim HC, . Stress generation during self-adjusting file movement: Minimally invasive instrumentation. J. Endod., 2013, 39: 1572-1575.

[40] Solomonov M. Eight months of clinical experience with the self-adjusting file system. J. Endod., 2011, 37: 881-887.

[41] Hülsmann M, Peters OA, Dummer PMH. Mechanical preparation of root canals: shaping goals, techniques and means. Endod. Top., 2005, 10: 30-76.

[42] Prichard J. Rotation or reciprocation: a contemporary look at NiTi instruments?. Br. Dent. J., 2012, 212: 345-346.

[43] Gambarini G, . Cyclic fatigue of instruments for endodontic glide path. Odontology, 2015, 103: 56-60.

[44] Lloyd A, Jaunberzins A, Dhopatkar A, Bryant S, Dummer PM. Shaping ability of the M4 handpiece and safety hedstrom files in simulated root canals. Int. Endod. J., 1997, 30: 16-24.

[45] Mohammadian F, . Comparison of apical transportation with the use of rotary system and reciprocating handpiece with precurved hand files: an in vitro study. Iran. Endod. J., 2017, 12: 462-467.

[46] Yared GM, Bou Dagher FE, Machtou P. Influence of rotational speed, torque and operator’s proficiency on ProFile failures. Int. Endod. J., 2001, 34: 47-53.

[47] Daugherty DW, Gound TG, Comer TL. Comparison of fracture rate, deformation rate, and efficiency between rotary endodontic instruments driven at 150 rpm and 350 rpm. J. Endod., 2001, 27: 93-95.

[48] Camps J, Pertot WJ. Torsional and stiffness properties of Canal Master U stainless steel and nitinol instruments. J. Endod., 1994, 20: 395-398.

[49] Schrader C, Peters OA. Analysis of torque and force with differently tapered rotary endodontic instruments in vitro. J. Endod., 2005, 31: 120-123.

[50] Martins JNR, . Influence of kinematics on the cyclic fatigue resistance of replicalike and original brand rotary instruments. J. Endod., 2020, 46: 1136-1143.

[51] Kimura S, . Effect of optimum torque reverse motion on torque and force generation during root canal instrumentation with crown-down and single-length techniques. J. Endod., 2020, 46: 232-237.

[52] Pedullà E, . Influence of continuous rotation or reciprocation of optimum torque reverse motion on cyclic fatigue resistance of nickel-titanium rotary instruments. Int. Endod. J., 2018, 51: 522-528.