Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2018 Jan-Feb;21(1):52-56.
doi: 10.4103/JCD.JCD_216_16.

Resistance to fracture of teeth instrumented using novel EndoStar E5 rotary versus ProTaper NEXT and WaveOne file systems

Ajinkya M Pawar  1 , Mansing G Pawar  2 , Bhagyashree Thakur  3 , Kulwinder Singh Banga  1 , Alexander Maniangat Luke  4
Affiliations

Resistance to fracture of teeth instrumented using novel EndoStar E5 rotary versus ProTaper NEXT and WaveOne file systems

Ajinkya M Pawar et al. J Conserv Dent. 2018 Jan-Feb.

Abstract

Aim: The current study compared the fracture resistance of samples instrumented by two rotary files and a reciprocating file, obturated with gutta-percha and AH Plus.

Materials and methods: A total of 60 freshly extracted mandibular premolar teeth with single roots and single canals were acquired and decoronated at or below the cementoenamel junction. The samples were randomly divided into four groups (n = 15). Group 1 control (noninstrumented/obturated), and for Groups 2-4 root canal instrumentation was done by EndoStar E5 (EE5), ProTaper NEXT (PTN), and WaveOne, respectively. Following instrumentation, the samples were obturated using gutta-percha cones and AH Plus sealer using lateral compaction. A week later, vertical load was applied to the specimen's canal in each group until fracture. The loads required for fracture were recorded and statistically analyzed.

Results: The mean loads required to fracture (Newton; N) for the four groups were; 388.54 (±29.93), 310.35 (±26.05), 328.40 (±20.67), and 278.54 (±34.16). The loads exhibited highly significant difference (P < 0.0001; analysis variance). The following Tukey's post hoc test confirmed, both samples in Groups 2 and 3 required similar loads for fracture (P > 0.05) and significantly higher than Group 4 (P < 0.01).

Conclusion: The samples instrumented by EE5 and PTN exhibit similar fracture resistance.

Keywords: EndoStar E5; ProTaper NEXT; WaveOne; fracture strength; instrumentation.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

There are no conflicts of interest.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
(a) The entire sequence of novel EndoStar E5 rotary file system comprising of five files. (b) The modified “S” shaped cross-section of the file exhibiting the two-point contact at an angle of 90°
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Shemesh H, Bier CA, Wu MK, Tanomaru-Filho M, Wesselink PR. The effects of canal preparation and filling on the incidence of dentinal defects. Int Endod J. 2009;42:208–13. - PubMed
    1. Yoldas O, Yilmaz S, Atakan G, Kuden C, Kasan Z. Dentinal microcrack formation during root canal preparations by different NiTi rotary instruments and the self-adjusting file. J Endod. 2012;38:232–5. - PubMed
    1. Fuss Z, Lustig J, Tamse A. Prevalence of vertical root fractures in extracted endodontically treated teeth. Int Endod J. 1999;32:283–6. - PubMed
    1. Pawar AM, Pawar SM, Pawar MG, Kokate SR. Fracture resistance of teeth instrumented by the self-adjusting file, ProTaper NEXT and WaveOne. J Pierre Fauchard Acad. 2014;28:83–7.
    1. Pawar AM, Barfwala D, Pawar M, Metzger Z, Kfir A, Jain N. Assessment of the fracture resistance of teeth instrumented using 2 rotary and 2 reciprocating les versus the Self-Adjusting File (SAF): An ex vivo comparative study on mandibular premolars. J Conserv Dent. 2016;19:138–42. - PMC - PubMed