Article Options


Advanced Search

This service is provided on D[e]nt Publishing standard Terms and Conditions. Please read our Privacy Policy. To enquire about a licence to reproduce material from and/or JofER, click here.
This website is published by D[e]nt Publishing Ltd, Phoenix AZ, US.
D[e]nt Publishing is part of the specialist publishing group Oral Science & Business Media Inc.

Creative Commons License

Recent Articles RSS:
Subscribe to recent articles RSS
or Subscribe to Email.

Blog RSS:
Subscribe to blog RSS
or Subscribe to Email.

Azerbaycan Saytlari

 »  Home  »  Endodontic Articles 5  »  Dynamic torque and apical forces of ProFile .04 rotary instruments during preparation of curved canals
Dynamic torque and apical forces of ProFile .04 rotary instruments during preparation of curved canals
Discussion - References.

Amongst several factors, success or failure of endodontic therapy depends on the quality of canal preparation (Pettiette et  al. 2001). Canals can readily be prepared in vitro with nickel–titanium rotary instruments such as ProFile .04 to have smooth and continuously tapering walls (Bryant et  al. 1998a, 1998b). These preparations also minimize procedural errors such as apical zipping or ledging and improve obturation and thereby reduce apical leakage (Wu et  al. 2000). Moreover, rotary instruments allow larger apical preparations (Schrader et  al. 1999) with little or no canal transportation (Portenier et  al. 1998). However, the increased risk of separation of nickel–titanium instruments remains a significant problem for many clinicians. Although some authors reported a high number of instruments showing plastic deformation after use with few separations (Thompson & Dummer 1997a, 1997b), others documented a higher incidence of fractures (Zuolo & Walton 1995, Mandel et  al. 1999).
Previous studies described findings related to bending moments and torsional properties (Serene et  al. 1995) as well as the cutting efficacy (Schäfer & Lau 1999) of nickel–titanium hand instruments. However, it is more difficult to study these properties correctly whilst preparing canals with rotary instruments. Technically, torque is measured in relation to a rotational axis, which should coincide with the instrument’s long axis (Fig. 1). Consequently, a resulting torsional moment can be measured whilst the instrument rotates in a straight canal. This principle was recently utilized in experiments by Blum et  al. (1999a) and Sattapan et  al. (2000a). Unfortunately, the results of these tests do not hold for curved canals, whilst nickel–titanium rotary instruments were primarily developed to shape curved canals. Furthermore, the incidence of instrument separation, clinically, is probably higher in severely curved than in straight canals.
It was decided to design and construct a platform to allow torque and force measurements in curved canals (Figs 1, 2). Using sensors with high resolution and regular calibration procedures, the amounts of torque that the motor transferred to the instrument’s shank could be recorded, in real time, during canal preparation. The amount of torque generated clearly depends on the size of the contact areas between the instruments and the canal walls, as was recently demonstrated (Blum et  al. 1999b). Clinically, however, the size of the contact area is unknown and it can vary following various instrumentation sequences.
Torsional load to separation as described by the ISO 3630–1 test was also recorded using the torque-testing device. The selected ProFile .04 instruments separated at torque scores varying from 3.7 Nmm to 32 Nmm. These results are in accordance with those stipulated by the ISO norm and with other documented findings (Table 4, Silvaggio & Hicks 1997). Furthermore, when torsional strain was plotted against deflection angles, curves typical for nickel–titanium (Rowan et  al. 1996, Thompson 2000) were constructed (Fig. 5).

Figure 9. Bar diagrams detailing the number of revolutions counted whilst preparing various canal types with ProFile .04 rotary instruments. Significant differences within one instrument size are indicated by horizontal bars (P < 0.05 or 0.01).

Bar diagrams detailing the number of revolutions counted whilst preparing various canal types with ProFile
Table 4. Literature review of torque scores assessed with different measuring set-ups.

Literature review of torque scores assessed with different measuring set-ups

Results listed above the shaded line detail load to fracture according to the ISO 3630-1 test, whilst results below the shaded line detail torques generated during canal preparation.
a. Recalculated into SI units: 1 gcm ~0.1 Nmm (1 Nmm = 1 mNm).

In contrast to these standard measurements, there were significantly higher torsional moments for most ProFile .04 rotary instruments tested during the simulated canal preparations. Interestingly, the highest torsional moments were generated in straight canals in plastic blocks, whilst the lowest scores were recorded in canals in extracted teeth (25 Nmm vs. 14 Nmm). This again emphasizes the importance of size of contact areas and the differences in surface texture between plastic blocks and extracted teeth. In addition, rather high torques were recorded during apical preparation in curved canals in plastic blocks using size 35 and 40 ProFile instruments. This finding might explain the high incidence of instrument deformation and fracture in laboratory studies (Thompson & Dummer 1997b) and during continuing education courses. Table 4 lists previously reported torque scores found either according to the ISO 3630–1 test or during canal preparation. Differences in the scores between the present paper and those reported by Blum et  al. (1999a, 1999b) may be due to varying instrumentation sequences and larger apical preparations in the current study. Moreover, the ‘endographe’ used by Blum et  al. (1999a, 1999b) was developed to assess forces developed during hand instrumentation (Blum et  al. 1997). The ‘endographe’ is similar to another device (Sattapan et  al. 2000a), both of which use conventional dental handpieces. This is not the case in the currently described torque-testing device.
Some confusion occurs when using the unit ‘gcm’ to describe torque. Because both ‘gcm’ and ‘Nm’ have been used, scores were recalculated to compare findings reported in the literature and summarized in Table 4. Sattapan et  al. (2000a) described torsional moments for Quantec instruments that were similar to the current results. It is evident from Table 4 that very low scores (<0.3 Nmm) have also been found (Blum et  al. 1999a, 1999b).
In the current study, apically directed loads of up to 7.5 N were recorded for all larger instruments. Lower scores were found in straight canals in plastic blocks compared to the scores recorded in canals in extracted teeth. Irrespective of the type of rotary instrument, all manufacturers recommend using only light pressure. Unfortunately, the word ‘light’ is not numerically defined. This is reflected when forces as low as 0.1 N were demonstrated for size 2 Quantec 2000 instruments (Sattapan et  al. 2000a). In contrast, the current study confirms earlier findings for apically directed forces (Blum et  al. 1999a). However, it is important to note that despite relatively high apical forces in the present study, no ProFile instruments separated during canal preparation. A recent retrospective analysis of separated instruments indicated two main modes of failure, namely, torsional and flexural types (Sattapan et  al. 2000b). Flexural fractures may arise from minute surface defects within the instruments (Eggert et  al. 1999, Luebke et  al. 2001) and occur after cyclic fatigue. This effect has been extensively tested utilizing various experimental conditions (Pruett et  al. 1997, Haikel et  al. 1999, Yared et  al. 1999, 2000). In order to compare cyclic fatigue, reported as number of revolutions to failure, a tempered steel phantom similar to that recently described (Haikel et  al. 1999) was incorporated in the torque-testing device. The results reported in the current study for this criteria for some selected ProFile.04 instruments agree with recent findings reported for these instruments (Haikel et  al. 1999, Yared et  al. 2000). In addition to the static standard cyclic fatigue test, an oscillating ‘pecking’ motion was also carried out using a second group of ProFile .04 instruments. Unexpectedly, the pecking motion did not significantly enhance the lifespan of size 30 and 45 ProFile instruments. When compared to the number of revolutions actually occurring during canal preparation, a safety factor indicates that at least 5–10 curved canals can be prepared with a set of ProFile .04 instruments. Original data recorded during the current study showed that any instrument generated torque for roughly 50% of the time it rotated. In other words, it is unlikely that cyclic fatigue can occur if a rotating instrument does not significantly contact canal walls. Consequently, cyclic fatigue is not necessarily the main reason for instrument failure.
Interestingly, significant differences were found between the three types of canals used in the current study. Although canals in plastic blocks presented highly standardized in vitro conditions, their canal cross-sections and surface properties differ from that of canals in extracted teeth. Moreover, the effect of the complicated three-dimensional anatomy on canal preparation must also be considered (Peters et  al. 2001a, 2001b). Likewise, operator experience resulting in a wide range of apical forces may also be a factor (Mandel et  al. 1999).
To summarize, the current study is the first to report torsional moments during rotary preparation of curved root canals. Further experiments with automated feed are required to detail the effects of instrument design or sequence on torsional moments and apically directed forces. In the future, the torque-testing device described in this paper should be combined with three-dimensional analysis to study the relationship between root canal anatomy and physical parameters during rotary preparation.


Barbakow F, Lutz F (1997) The 'Lightspeed' preparation technique evaluated by Swiss clinicians after attending continuing education courses. International Endodontic Journal 30, 46-50.
Blum JY, Machtou P, Esber S, Micallef JP (1997) Analysis of forces developed during root canal preparation with the balanced force technique. International Endodontic Journal 30, 386-96.
Blum JY, Cohen A, Machtou P, Micallef JP (1999a) Analysis of forces developed during mechanical preparation of extracted teeth using Profile NiTi rotary instruments. International Endodontic Journal 32, 24-31.
Blum JY, Machtou P, Micallef JP (1999b) Location of contact areas on rotary Profile instruments in relationship to the forces developed during mechanical preparation on extracted teeth. International Endodontic Journal 32, 108-14.
Bryant S, Thompson S, Al-Omari M, Dummer PMH (1998a) Shaping ability of Profile rotary nickel-titanium instruments with ISO sized tips in simulated root canals: Part 1. International Endodontic Journal 31, 275-81.
Bryant S, Thompson S, Al-Omari M, Dummer PMH (1998b) Shaping ability of Profile rotary nickel-titanium instruments with ISO sized tips in simulated root canals: Part 2. International Endodontic Journal 31, 282-9.
Camps JJ, Pertot WJ (1994a) Relationship between file size and stiffness of stainless steel instruments. Endodontics and Dental Traumatology 10, 260-3.
Camps JJ, Pertot WJ (1994b) Torsional properties of stainless steel Canal Master U and Flexogates. International Endodontic Journal 27, 334-8.
Camps J, Pertot WJ (1994c) Torsional and stiffness properties of Canal Master U stainless steel and nitinol instruments. Journal of Endodontics 20, 395-8.
Eggert C, Peters O, Barbakow F (1999) Wear of Nickel-Titanium Lightspeed instruments evaluated by scanning electron microscopy. Journal of Endodontics 25, 494-7.
Gambarini G (2000) Rationale for the use of low-torque endodontic motors in root canal instrumentation. Endodontics and Dental Traumatology 16, 95-100.
Glosson CR, Haller RH, Dove SB, del Rio C (1995) A comparison of root canal preparations using NiTi hand, NiTi engine driven, and K-Flex endodontic instruments. Journal of Endodontics 21, 146-51.
Haikel Y, Serfaty R, Bateman G, Senger B, Allemann C (1999) Dynamic and cyclic fatigue of engine-driven rotary Nickel- Titanium endodontic instruments. Journal of Endodontics 25, 434-40.
International Organization for Standardisation (1992) Dental Root-Canal Instruments- Part 1: Files, Reamers, Barbed Broaches, Rasps, Paste Carriers, Explorers and Cotton Broaches. Geneva: ISO.
Luebke NH, Lausten LL, Brantley WA, Mitchell JC (2001) Torsional performance of Nickel-titanium Gates Glidden drills with an applied bending deflection (abstract). Journal of Dental Research 80, 259.
Mandel E, Adib-Yazdi M, Benhamou LM, Lachkar T, Mesgouez C, Sobel M (1999) Rotary Ni-Ti profile systems for preparing curved canals in resin blocks: influence of operator on instrument breakage. International Endodontic Journal 32, 436-43.
Peters OA, Sch?nenberger K, Laib A (2001a) Effects of four NiTi preparation techniques on root canal geometry assessed by Micro computed tomography. International Endodontic Journal 34, 221-230.
Peters OA, Laib A, G?hring TN, Barbakow F (2001b) Changes in root canal geometry after preparation assessed by highresolution computed tomography. Journal of Endodontics 27, 1-6.
Pettiette MT, Olutayo Delano E, Trope M (2001) Evaluation of success rate of endodontic treatment performed by students with stainless-steel K-files and Nickel-Titanium hand files. Journal of Endodontics 27, 124-7.
Portenier I, Lutz F, Barbakow F (1998) Preparation of the apical part of the root canal by the Lightspeed and step-back techniques. International Endodontic Journal 31, 103-11.
Pruett J, Clement D, Carnes DJ (1997) Cyclic fatigue testing of nickel-titanium endodontic instruments. Journal of Endodontics 23, 77-85.
Rowan MB, Nicholls JI, Steiner J (1996) Torsional properties of Stainless Steel and Nickel-Titanium endodontic files. Journal of Endodontics 22, 341-5.
Sattapan B, Palamara JEA, Messer HH (2000a) Torque during canal instrumentation using rotary Nickel-Titanium files. Journal of Endodontics 26, 156-60.
Sattapan B, Nervo GJ, Palamara JEA, Messer HH (2000b) Defects in rotary Nickel-Titanium files after clinical use. Journal of Endodontics 26, 161-5.
Sch?fer E (2000) Wurzelkanalbehandlungen. Deutsche Zahn?rztliche Zeitschrift 55, 730-40.
Sch?fer E, Lau R (1999) Comparison of cutting efficiency and instrumentation of curved canals with Nickel-Titanium and stainless-steel instruments. Journal of Endodontics 25, 427- 30.
Schneider SW (1971) A comparison of canal preparation in straight and curved root canals. Oral Surgery 32, 271-5.
Schrader C, Ackermann M, Barbakow F (1999) Step-by-step description of a rotary root canal preparation technique. International Endodontic Journal 32, 312-20.
Serene TP, Adams JD, Saxena A (1995) Nickel-Titanium Instruments: Applications in Endodontics. St. Louis, MO, USA: Ishiaku EuroAmerica, Inc.
Silvaggio J, Hicks ML (1997) Effect of heat sterilisation on the torsional properties of rotary Nickel-titanium endodontic files. Journal of Endodontics 23, 731-4.
Thompson SA (2000) An overview of nickel-titanium alloys used in dentistry. International Endodontic Journal 33, 297- 310.
Thompson SA, Dummer PMH (1997a) Shaping ability of ProFile .04 taper Series 29 rotary nickel-titanium instruments. Part 1. International Endodontic Journal 30, 1-7.
Thompson SA, Dummer PMH (1997b) Shaping ability of ProFile .04 taper Series 29 rotary nickel-titanium instruments. Part 2. International Endodontic Journal 30, 8-15.
Weine FS (1996) Endodontic Therapy, 5th edn. St. Louis, MO, USA: Mosby. Wu MK, Fan B, Wesselink P (2000) Leakage along apical root fillings in curved root canals. Part I: Effects of apical transportation on seal of root fillings. Journal of Endodontics 26, 210-6.
Yared GM, Bou Dagher FE, Machtou P (1999) Cyclic fatigue of ProFile rotary instruments after simulated clinical use. International Endodontic Journal 32, 115-9.
Yared GM, Bou Dagher FE, Machtou P (2000) Cyclic fatigue of ProFile rotary instruments after clinical use. International Endodontic Journal 33, 204-7.
Zuolo ML, Walton RE (1995) Instrument deterioration with usage: Nickel-Titanium versus stainless steel. Quintessence International 28, 397-402.