Evaluating the cutting efficiency of NiTi instruments with reciprocating motions

Caroline Christine Santa-Rosa, Pedro Damas Resende, Isabella Faria da Cunha Peixoto, Vicente Tadeu Lopes Buono, Ana Cecília Diniz Viana, Maria Guiomar de Azevedo Bahia


Aim: This study tested a setup for in vitro experimental analysis of axial forces and torque during the preparation of artificial canals using nickel-titanium reciprocating endodontic files. Methods: The cutting efficiency of Reciproc (RC) and WaveOne (WO) reciprocating size 25/.08 instruments (n = 10) was evaluated, taking into account their dimensional and geometrical features. Measurements of the diameter at each millimeter from the tip, pitch length, helical angle, and cross-sectional design and area were assessed. Cutting efficiency tests were carried out on a specific bench device by measuring the torque and axial force required during artificial canal shaping. Statistical analysis was performed using one-way ANOVA (α = 0.05). Results: The WO samples showed larger A3 mean values than did the RC instruments (P <.0001), despite having equal diameters at 3mm from the tip (D3) (P = .521). The mean values of pitch length were higher for RC than for WO instruments (P <.0001), with consequently smaller helical angles (P <.0001). For the cutting efficiency tests, the required torque was lower for the RC group when compared to the WO group, but it was significant only in the first stage of insertion in the artificial canals (P = .008). Regarding the apical force, the RC instruments reached higher values when compared to the WO instruments (P = .04) in the second stage of cutting action. Conclusion: Reciproc instruments demonstrated statistically higher cutting efficiency when compared to WaveOne instruments.

Uniterms: cutting efficiency; M-Wire; reciprocating motion; Reciproc; WaveOne


(01) De-Deus G, Moreira EJ, Lopes HP, Elias CN. Extended cyclic fatigue life of F2 ProTaper instruments used in reciprocating movement. Int Endod J. 2010 Dec;43(12):1063-8.

(02) Nabeshima CK, Caballero-Flores H, Cai S, Aranguren J, Britto MLB, Machado ME. Bacterial removal promoted by 2 single-file systems: Wave One and One Shape. J Endod. 2014 Dec;40(12):1995-8.

(03) Sonntag D, Peters OA. Effect of prion decontamination protocols on nickel-titanium rotary surfaces. J Endod. 2007 Apr;33(4):442-6. Epub 2007 Feb 23.

(04) You SY, Bae KS, Baek SH, Kum KY, Shon WJ, Lee W. Lifespan of one nickel-titanium rotary file with reciprocating motion in curved root canals. J Endod. 2010 Dec;36(12):1991-4.

(05) Yared G. Canal preparation using only one Ni-Ti rotary instrument: preliminary observations. Int Endod J. 2008 Apr;41(4):339-44. Epub 2007 Dec 12.

(06) Kim HC, Kwak SW, Cheung GS, Ko DH, Chung SM, Lee W. Cyclic fatigue and torsional resistance of two new nickel-titanium instruments used in reciprocation motion: Reciproc versus WaveOne. J Endod. 2012 Apr;38(4):541-4.

(07) Schäfer E. Relationship between design features of endodontic instruments and their properties. Part 1. Cutting efficiency. J Endod 1999;25:52–5.

(08) Hülsmann M, Peters O, Dummer PMH. Mechanical preparation of root canals. Shaping goals, techniques and means. Endod Top 2005;10:30-76.

(09) Schäfer E, Oitzinger M. Cutting efficiency of five different types of rotary nickel-titanium instruments. J Endod 2008;34:198-200.

(10) Grande NM, Ahmed HM, Cohen S, Bukiet F, Plotino G. Current assessment of rteciprocation in endodontic peparation: a comprehensive review-part II: Properties and effectiveness. J Endod. 2015 Nov;41(11):1778-83.

(11) Rapisarda E, Bonaccorso A, Tripi TR, Condorelli GG. Effect of sterilization on the cutting efficiency of rotary nickel-titanium endodontic files. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 1999 Sep;88(3):343-7.

(12) Vinothkumar TS, Miglani R, Lakshminarayananan L. Influence of deep dry cryogenic treatment on cutting efficiency and wear resistance of nickel-titanium rotary endodontic instruments. J Endod. 2007 Nov;33(11):1355-8. Epub 2007 Aug 23.

(13) Morgental RD, Vier-Pelisser FV, Kopper PM, de Figueiredo JA, Peters OA. Cutting efficiency of conventional and martensitic nickel-titanium instruments for coronal flaring. J Endod. 2013 Dec;39(12):1634-8.

(14) Peters OA, Morgental RD, Schulze KA, Paqué F, Kopper PM, Vier-Pelisser FV. Determining cutting efficiency of nickel-titanium coronal flaring instruments used in lateral action. Int Endod J. 2014 Jun;47(6):505-13

(15) Schäfer E, Erler M, Dammaschke T. Comparative study on the shaping ability and cleaning efficiency of rotary Mtwo instruments: Part 1. Shaping ability in simulated curved canals. Int Endod J. 2006 Mar;39(3):196-202.

(16) Bürklein S, Benten S, Schäfer E. Shaping ability of different single-file systems in severely curved root canals of extracted teeth. Int Endod J. 2013 Jun;46(6):590-7.

(17) Shen Y, Haapasalo M. Three-dimensional analysis of cutting behavior of nickel-titanium rotary instruments by microcomputed tomography. J Endod. 2008 May;34(5):606-10.

(18) Kim JW1, Griggs JA, Regan JD, Ellis RA, Cai Z. Effect of cryogenic treatment on nickel-titanium endodontic instruments. Int Endod J. 2005 Jun;38(6):364-71.

(19) Peixoto IF, Pereira ÉS, Aun DP, Buono VT, Bahia MG. Constant insertion rate methodology for measuring torque and apical force in 3 nickel-titanium instruments with different cross-sectional designs. J Endod. 2015 Sep;41(9):1540-4.

(20) Tepel J, Schäfer E, Hoppe W. Properties of endodontic hand instruments used in rotary motion. Part 1. Cutting efficiency. J Endod. 1995 Aug;21(8):418-21.

(21) Diemer F, Michetti J, Mallet JP, Piquet R. Effect of asymmetry on behavior of prototype rotary triple helix root canal instruments. J Endod. 2013 Jun;39(6):829-32.

(22) Kum KY, Spängberg L, Cha BY, Il-Young J, Msd, Seung-Jong L, Chan Young L. Shaping ability of three pro file rotary instrumentation techniques in simulated resin root canals. J Endod. 2000 Dec;26(12):719-23.

(23) Schrader C, Peters OA. Analysis of torque and force with differently tapered rotary endodontic instruments in vitro. J Endod. 2005 Feb;31(2):120-3.

(24) Plotino G, Giansiracusa Rubini A, Grande NM, Testarelli L, Gambarini G. Cutting efficiency of Reciproc and WaveOne reciprocating instruments. J Endod. 2014 Aug;40(8):1228-30.

(25) Melo MC1, Pereira ES, Viana AC, Fonseca AM, Buono VT, Bahia MG. Dimensional characterization and mechanical behavior of K3 rotary instruments. Int Endod J. 2008 Apr;41(4):329-38.

(26) Kim HC, Kim HJ, Lee CJ, Kim BM, Park JK, Versluis A. Mechanical response of nickel-titanium instruments with different cross-sectional designs during shaping of simulated curved canals. Int Endod J. 2009 Jul;42(7):593-602.

(27) Wan J, Rasimick BJ, Musikant BL, Deutsch AS. Cutting efficiency of 3 different instrument designs used in reciprocation. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2010 May;109(5):e82-5.

(28) Wildey W, Senia S, Montgomery S. Another look at root canal instrumentation. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol. 1992 Oct;74(4):499-507.

(29) Diemer F, Calas P. Effect of pitch length on the behavior of rotary triple helix root canal instruments. J Endod 2004;30:716-9.

(30) Schäfer E, Tepel J, Hoppe W. Properties of endodontic hand instruments used in rotary motion Part 1 cutting efficiency. J Endod 1995;21:418-21.


  • Não há apontamentos.