Torsional resistance of three ProTaper rotary systems
BMC Oral Health.
Alqedairi A1, Alfawaz H1, Abualjadayel B1, Alanazi M1, Alkhalifah A1, Jamleh A2.
1 Department of Restorative Dental Sciences, College of Dentistry, King Saud University, Riyadh, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia.
2 King Abdullah International Medical Research Centre, Restorative and Prosthetic Dental Sciences, College of Dentistry, Ministry of National Guard Health Affairs, King Saud bin Abdulaziz University for Health Sciences, P.O. Box 22490, Riyadh, 11426, Saudi Arabia.
Year of Publication:
The aim of this study is to compare the torsional resistance of the available ProTaper rotary systems, namely, ProTaper Universal (PTU), ProTaper Next (PTN), and ProTaper Gold (PTG).
A total of 195 files from the three systems distributed into 13 groups (PTU-S1, PTU-S2, PTU-F1, PTU-F2, PTU-F3, PTG-S1, PTG-S2, PTG-F1, PTG-F2, PTG-F3, PTN-X1, PTN-X2 and PTN-X3) were subjected to torsional fatigue until failure. The torsional test was performed according to ISO 3630-1, where each file was placed in a straight position to eliminate the influence of cyclic fatigue. The Kruskal-Wallis test was conducted to compare the mean maximum torques and angular deflections at fracture for the groups, and the Mann-Whitney test was performed for pairwise comparisons. The significance level was set at 0.05 and the fractured surfaces were examined under a scanning electron microscope.
Among the tested files, PTG-S1 had the lowest torsional fatigue resistance, whereas PTU-F2 and PTU-F3 had the highest torsional resistance. The scanning electron microscope showed typical features of torsional failure.
The new ProTaper systems (PTG and PTN) did not show improved torsional resistance in comparison with PTU.