RESUMO
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the accuracy of the Root ZX II (RZX), Raypex 6 (RAY), EPex Pro (EPEX), and CanalPro (CNP) electronic foramen locators (EFLs) in different foraminal morphologies (fully formed foramen, immature foramen with parallel walls, and immature foramen with divergent walls); this article also evaluated the influence of different penetration levels (0.0 mm and -1.0 mm). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Thirty single-rooted human premolars were accessed and had their cervical/middle thirds prepared with SX ProTaper files. The apical foramens (AF) were standardized to 250 µm and the initial root canal length (RCL1) was measured under 16x magnification with aid of a digital caliper. Using the alginate model, electronic measurements (EM) were taken 1.0 mm up to AF (EM1/-1) and at AF (EM1/0), always using adjusted hand K-files. The root apexes were then cross-sectioned 3.0 mm from the foramen; then, new RCL (RCL2) and electronic measurements were performed (EM2/-1 and EM2/0.0). Finally, retropreparations were performed with instruments SX ProTaper files introduced 4.0 mm in the apicocervical direction. Then new RCL (RCL3) and electronic measurements (EM3/-1 and EM3/0) were performed. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Values were tabulated and tested for normality using the Shapiro-Wilk test, which yielded nonparametric distributions of the data. Data were subjected to the Kruskal-Wallis and Dunn tests to estimate possible differences between devices as a function of foramen morphology and/or apical limit. The significance level was set at 5.0%. RESULTS: In general, the EFLs were accurate in determining the RCL. Statistically significant differences were observed between EPEX and RAY at 0.0, when measuring the divergent AF canals (p < 0.05). Regarding the different foramen morphologies in each EFL, RZX and EPEX showed no interference (p > 0.05), whereas RAY and CNP had lower accuracy levels at 0.0 with divergent AF (p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: The four devices evaluated are accurate to determine the RCL in the conditions tested. The apical limit of penetration did not have significant influence on their accuracy. Conversely, the presence of divergence in the AF walls negatively influenced de RAY and CNP precisions at the foraminal level.
RESUMO
Introduction: This study aims to evaluate the cyclic and torsional fatigue resistance of seven rotary systems. Methods and Materials: A total of 140 instruments were tested, 20 of each system including Genius (GN) 25/0.04, TruShape (TS) 25/0.06, Logic (LOG) 25/0.06 taper, Vortex Blue (VB) 25/0.06, ProTaper Gold (PTG) 25/0.08, Hyflex CM (HCM) 25/0.06 and Hyflex EDM (EDM) 25/0.08 taper. Cyclic fatigue resistance testing was performed using an artificial stainless steel canal with a curvature (60° angle and 5-mm radius) located at 5 mm from the tip. The files (n=10) rotated until fracture, and time was recorded in seconds. The torsional test was evaluated according to ISO 3630-1. Data were analysed with one-way ANOVA and Tukey's tests (α=5%). The fractured surface of the instruments were assessed using scanning electron microscopy to confirm the type of fracture. Results: The cyclic fatigue resistance value of EDM was significantly higher than those of all tested instruments (P<0.05). LOG showed a higher cyclic fatigue resistance than GN or TS (P<0.05). There was no difference among the other groups (P>0.05). The torsional test showed that PTG 25/0.08 had the highest torsional strength value of all instruments tested followed by VB and EDM (P<0.05). The LOG showed significant difference only with GN (P<0.05). No difference was found among the other groups (P>0.05). In relation to angular deflection, the GN; TS; HCM, and EDM showed significantly higher values until fracture than the other groups (P<0.05). No difference was found among PTG, LOG, and VB (P>0.05). Conclusion: Our in vitro study EDM group had the highest cyclic fatigue resistance among all the tested instruments. For the torsional test, the PTG showed highest torsional strength and lowest angular deflection values.
