ANÁLISE COMPARATIVA DAS CARACTERÍSTICAS MECÂNICAS DE INSTRUMENTOS MANUAIS DE AÇO INOXIDÁVEL TIPO K: UM ESTUDO DE DIFERENTES MARCAS
Barra lateral de artigos
Publicado:
out 29, 2024
Palavras-chave:
Instrumentos odontológicos, Aço inoxidável, Endodontia, Preparo de canal radicular, Tratamento de canal radicular, Avaliação de Propriedades Mecânicas
Conteúdo do artigo principal
Resumo
O presente estudo teve como objetivo comparar as características geométricas e mecânicas de seis marcas diferentes de instrumentos manuais de aço inoxidável tipo K. Foram analisados instrumentos nos tamanhos 15 e 20, por meio de testes de resistência à flambagem e torção, seguindo as normas ISO 3630-1 e ANSI/ADA 101. A micromorfometria avaliou diâmetros e conicidades em pontos específicos (D0 e D3). Os resultados indicaram que os instrumentos TDK 15 e Angelus 0.20 apresentaram maior resistência à flambagem, enquanto variações no diâmetro em D0 foram observadas principalmente nos instrumentos TDK 15 e Perfect 15. Em relação à torção, os instrumentos Maillefer 0.20 destacaram-se pela maior deflexão angular antes da fratura, sugerindo maior flexibilidade. Assim, os instrumentos TDK 15 e Angelus 0.20 mostraram-se mais adequados para a negociação de canais atrésicos e retratamento endodôntico, porém as variações no diâmetro dos instrumentos TDK 15 e Perfect 15 podem comprometer a adaptação de cones na fase de obturação. Já os instrumentos Maillefer 0.20, com maior flexibilidade, são mais indicados para canais curvos.
Detalhes do artigo
Como Citar
ANÁLISE COMPARATIVA DAS CARACTERÍSTICAS MECÂNICAS DE INSTRUMENTOS MANUAIS DE AÇO INOXIDÁVEL TIPO K: UM ESTUDO DE DIFERENTES MARCAS. (2024). Revista Naval De Odontologia, 51(2), 06-13. https://doi.org/10.69909/1983-7550-endo-1
Seção
Artigos Originais
Como Citar
ANÁLISE COMPARATIVA DAS CARACTERÍSTICAS MECÂNICAS DE INSTRUMENTOS MANUAIS DE AÇO INOXIDÁVEL TIPO K: UM ESTUDO DE DIFERENTES MARCAS. (2024). Revista Naval De Odontologia, 51(2), 06-13. https://doi.org/10.69909/1983-7550-endo-1
Referências
1. Darcey J, Taylor C, Roudsari RV, Jawad S, Hunter M. Modern endodontic principles part 3: preparation. Dent Update. 2015;42(9):810–22.
2. Karamifar K, Tondari A, Saghiri MA. Endodontic periapical lesion: an overview on the etiology, diagnosis and current treatment modalities. Eur Endod J. 2020;5(2):54.
3. Allen MJ, Glickman GN, Griggs JA. Comparative analysis of endodontic pathfinders. J Endod. 2007;33(6):723–6.
4. Kwak SW, Ha JH, Lee W, Kim SK, Kim HC. Buckling resistance, bending stiffness, and torsional resistance of various instruments for canal exploration and glide path preparation. Restor Dent Endod. 2014;39(4):270–5.
5. Dias DS, Ribeiro GD, Martuche R da S, Antunes H dos S, Vieira VTL, Silva EJNL da. Análise morfométrica e flexão rotativa de instrumentos tipo K de uma empresa nacional. Rev Bras Odontol. 2017;74(2):96–100.
6. Baruwa AO, Chasqueira F, Arantes-Oliveira S, Caramês J, Marques D, Portugal J, et al. Comparative Analysis of Endodontic ISO Size 06, 08, and 10 Stainless Steel K-Files Used for Glide Path Procedures. Dent J. 2024;12(4):98.
7. Lopes HP, Elias CN, Mangelli M, Lopes WS, Amaral G, Souza LC, et al. Buckling resistance of pathfinding endodontic instruments. J Endod. 2012;38(3):402–4.
8. Bhuva B, Ikram O. Complications in endodontics. Prim Dent J. 2020;9(4):52–8.
9. Yilmaz ÖS, Keskin C, Aydemir H. Comparison of the torsional resistance of 4 different glide path instruments. J Endod. 2021;47(6):970–5.
10. Hartmann R, Peters OA, De Figueiredo J, Rossi‐Fedele G. Association of manual or engine‐driven glide path preparation with canal centring and apical transportation: a systematic review. Int Endod J. 2018;51(11):1239–52.
11. Yilmaz ÖS, Keskin C, Aydemir H. Comparison of the torsional resistance of 4 different glide path instruments. J Endod. 2021;47(6):970–5.
12. Kwak SW, Ha JH, Lee W, Kim SK, Kim HC. Buckling resistance, bending stiffness, and torsional resistance of various instruments for canal exploration and glide path preparation. Restor Dent Endod. 2014;39(4):270–5.
13. Baruwa AO, Chasqueira F, Arantes-Oliveira S, Caramês J, Marques D, Portugal J, et al. Comparative Analysis of Endodontic 0.15 Stainless-Steel K-Files: Exploring Design, Composition, and Mechanical Performance. Dent J. 2024;12(2):29.
14. Cassim I, Van der Vyver PJ. The importance of glide path preparation in endodontics: a consideration of instruments and literature: scientific. South Afr Dent J. 2013;68(7):322–7.
15. West JD. The endodontic Glidepath:" Secret to rotary safety". Dent Today. 2010;29(9):86–8.
16. Barbosa IB, Ferreira FG, Scelza P, Adeodato C, Caldas IP, Goncalves FP, et al. Structural analysis of NiTi endodontic instruments: A systematic review. Iran Endod J. 2020;15(3):124.
17. Ferreira F, Adeodato C, Barbosa I, Aboud L, Scelza P, Zaccaro Scelza M. Movement kinematics and cyclic fatigue of NiTi rotary instruments: a systematic review. Int Endod J. 2017;50(2):143–52.
18. Lopes HP, Elias CN, Siqueira Jr JF, Soares RG, Souza LC, Oliveira JC, et al. Mechanical behavior of pathfinding endodontic instruments. J Endod. 2012;38(10):1417–21.
19. Plotino G, Nagendrababu V, Bukiet F, Grande NM, Veettil SK, De-Deus G, et al. Influence of negotiation, glide path, and preflaring procedures on root canal shaping—terminology, basic concepts, and a systematic review. J Endod. 2020;46(6):707–29.
20. dos Santos MR da S, Carvalho EP, Lunz JSC, da Silva EJNL, Moreira EJL, Vieira VTL. Correlação do diâmetro do preparo de uma nova geração de instrumentos de NiTi com as dimensões de cones de guta-percha de sua antiga geração através de uma análise morfométrica. Rev Bras Odontol. 2016;73(3):180.
21. Genç Ö, Alaçam T, Kayaoglu G. Evaluation of three instrumentation techniques at the precision of apical stop and apical sealing of obturation. J Appl Oral Sci. 2011;19:350–4.
22. dos Santos MR da S, Carvalho EP, Lunz JSC, da Silva EJNL, Moreira EJL, Vieira VTL. Correlação do diâmetro do preparo de uma nova geração de instrumentos de NiTi com as dimensões de cones de guta-percha de sua antiga geração através de uma análise morfométrica. Rev Bras Odontol. 2016;73(3):180.
23. Rodrigues SS, Ribeiro MRA, Pereira LB, Júnior HM. Avaliação de padrões dimensionais de diferentes marcas comerciais de limas endodônticas manuais tipo KERR. Perquirere. 2021;1(18):134–47.
24. West JD. The endodontic Glidepath:" Secret to rotary safety". Dent Today. 2010;29(9):86–8.
25. Berutti E, Negro AR, Lendini M, Pasqualini D. Influence of manual preflaring and torque on the failure rate of ProTaper rotary instruments. J Endod. 2004;30(4):228–30.
26. Peters OA. Current challenges and concepts in the preparation of root canal systems: a review. J Endod. 2004;30(8):559–67.
27. Patiño PV, Biedma BM, Liébana CR, Cantatore G, Bahillo JG. The influence of a manual glide path on the separation rate of NiTi rotary instruments. J Endod. 2005;31(2):114–6.
28. Lopes W, Vieira V, Silva EL, Silva MD, Alves F, Lopes H, et al. Bending, buckling and torsional resistance of rotary and reciprocating glide path instruments. Int Endod J. 2020;53(12):1689–95.
29. Lopes HP, Elias CN, Mangelli M, Lopes WS, Amaral G, Souza LC, et al. Buckling resistance of pathfinding endodontic instruments. J Endod. 2012;38(3):402–4.
30. Jafarzadeh H, Abbott PV. Ledge formation: review of a great challenge in endodontics. J Endod. 2007;33(10):1155–62.
31. Elsaka S, Elnaghy A, Badr A. Torsional and bending resistance of WaveOne Gold, Reciproc and twisted file adaptive instruments. Int Endod J. 2017;50(11):1077–83.
32. Silva EJNL, Vieira VTL, Hecksher F, dos Santos Oliveira MRS, dos Santos Antunes H, Moreira EJL. Cyclic fatigue using severely curved canals and torsional resistance of thermally treated reciprocating instruments. Clin Oral Investig. 2018;22:2633–8.
33. Lopes HP, Elias CN, Amaral G, Vieira VT, Moreira EJ, Mangelli M, et al. Torsional properties of pathfinding instruments. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endodontology. 2011;112(5):667–70.
2. Karamifar K, Tondari A, Saghiri MA. Endodontic periapical lesion: an overview on the etiology, diagnosis and current treatment modalities. Eur Endod J. 2020;5(2):54.
3. Allen MJ, Glickman GN, Griggs JA. Comparative analysis of endodontic pathfinders. J Endod. 2007;33(6):723–6.
4. Kwak SW, Ha JH, Lee W, Kim SK, Kim HC. Buckling resistance, bending stiffness, and torsional resistance of various instruments for canal exploration and glide path preparation. Restor Dent Endod. 2014;39(4):270–5.
5. Dias DS, Ribeiro GD, Martuche R da S, Antunes H dos S, Vieira VTL, Silva EJNL da. Análise morfométrica e flexão rotativa de instrumentos tipo K de uma empresa nacional. Rev Bras Odontol. 2017;74(2):96–100.
6. Baruwa AO, Chasqueira F, Arantes-Oliveira S, Caramês J, Marques D, Portugal J, et al. Comparative Analysis of Endodontic ISO Size 06, 08, and 10 Stainless Steel K-Files Used for Glide Path Procedures. Dent J. 2024;12(4):98.
7. Lopes HP, Elias CN, Mangelli M, Lopes WS, Amaral G, Souza LC, et al. Buckling resistance of pathfinding endodontic instruments. J Endod. 2012;38(3):402–4.
8. Bhuva B, Ikram O. Complications in endodontics. Prim Dent J. 2020;9(4):52–8.
9. Yilmaz ÖS, Keskin C, Aydemir H. Comparison of the torsional resistance of 4 different glide path instruments. J Endod. 2021;47(6):970–5.
10. Hartmann R, Peters OA, De Figueiredo J, Rossi‐Fedele G. Association of manual or engine‐driven glide path preparation with canal centring and apical transportation: a systematic review. Int Endod J. 2018;51(11):1239–52.
11. Yilmaz ÖS, Keskin C, Aydemir H. Comparison of the torsional resistance of 4 different glide path instruments. J Endod. 2021;47(6):970–5.
12. Kwak SW, Ha JH, Lee W, Kim SK, Kim HC. Buckling resistance, bending stiffness, and torsional resistance of various instruments for canal exploration and glide path preparation. Restor Dent Endod. 2014;39(4):270–5.
13. Baruwa AO, Chasqueira F, Arantes-Oliveira S, Caramês J, Marques D, Portugal J, et al. Comparative Analysis of Endodontic 0.15 Stainless-Steel K-Files: Exploring Design, Composition, and Mechanical Performance. Dent J. 2024;12(2):29.
14. Cassim I, Van der Vyver PJ. The importance of glide path preparation in endodontics: a consideration of instruments and literature: scientific. South Afr Dent J. 2013;68(7):322–7.
15. West JD. The endodontic Glidepath:" Secret to rotary safety". Dent Today. 2010;29(9):86–8.
16. Barbosa IB, Ferreira FG, Scelza P, Adeodato C, Caldas IP, Goncalves FP, et al. Structural analysis of NiTi endodontic instruments: A systematic review. Iran Endod J. 2020;15(3):124.
17. Ferreira F, Adeodato C, Barbosa I, Aboud L, Scelza P, Zaccaro Scelza M. Movement kinematics and cyclic fatigue of NiTi rotary instruments: a systematic review. Int Endod J. 2017;50(2):143–52.
18. Lopes HP, Elias CN, Siqueira Jr JF, Soares RG, Souza LC, Oliveira JC, et al. Mechanical behavior of pathfinding endodontic instruments. J Endod. 2012;38(10):1417–21.
19. Plotino G, Nagendrababu V, Bukiet F, Grande NM, Veettil SK, De-Deus G, et al. Influence of negotiation, glide path, and preflaring procedures on root canal shaping—terminology, basic concepts, and a systematic review. J Endod. 2020;46(6):707–29.
20. dos Santos MR da S, Carvalho EP, Lunz JSC, da Silva EJNL, Moreira EJL, Vieira VTL. Correlação do diâmetro do preparo de uma nova geração de instrumentos de NiTi com as dimensões de cones de guta-percha de sua antiga geração através de uma análise morfométrica. Rev Bras Odontol. 2016;73(3):180.
21. Genç Ö, Alaçam T, Kayaoglu G. Evaluation of three instrumentation techniques at the precision of apical stop and apical sealing of obturation. J Appl Oral Sci. 2011;19:350–4.
22. dos Santos MR da S, Carvalho EP, Lunz JSC, da Silva EJNL, Moreira EJL, Vieira VTL. Correlação do diâmetro do preparo de uma nova geração de instrumentos de NiTi com as dimensões de cones de guta-percha de sua antiga geração através de uma análise morfométrica. Rev Bras Odontol. 2016;73(3):180.
23. Rodrigues SS, Ribeiro MRA, Pereira LB, Júnior HM. Avaliação de padrões dimensionais de diferentes marcas comerciais de limas endodônticas manuais tipo KERR. Perquirere. 2021;1(18):134–47.
24. West JD. The endodontic Glidepath:" Secret to rotary safety". Dent Today. 2010;29(9):86–8.
25. Berutti E, Negro AR, Lendini M, Pasqualini D. Influence of manual preflaring and torque on the failure rate of ProTaper rotary instruments. J Endod. 2004;30(4):228–30.
26. Peters OA. Current challenges and concepts in the preparation of root canal systems: a review. J Endod. 2004;30(8):559–67.
27. Patiño PV, Biedma BM, Liébana CR, Cantatore G, Bahillo JG. The influence of a manual glide path on the separation rate of NiTi rotary instruments. J Endod. 2005;31(2):114–6.
28. Lopes W, Vieira V, Silva EL, Silva MD, Alves F, Lopes H, et al. Bending, buckling and torsional resistance of rotary and reciprocating glide path instruments. Int Endod J. 2020;53(12):1689–95.
29. Lopes HP, Elias CN, Mangelli M, Lopes WS, Amaral G, Souza LC, et al. Buckling resistance of pathfinding endodontic instruments. J Endod. 2012;38(3):402–4.
30. Jafarzadeh H, Abbott PV. Ledge formation: review of a great challenge in endodontics. J Endod. 2007;33(10):1155–62.
31. Elsaka S, Elnaghy A, Badr A. Torsional and bending resistance of WaveOne Gold, Reciproc and twisted file adaptive instruments. Int Endod J. 2017;50(11):1077–83.
32. Silva EJNL, Vieira VTL, Hecksher F, dos Santos Oliveira MRS, dos Santos Antunes H, Moreira EJL. Cyclic fatigue using severely curved canals and torsional resistance of thermally treated reciprocating instruments. Clin Oral Investig. 2018;22:2633–8.
33. Lopes HP, Elias CN, Amaral G, Vieira VT, Moreira EJ, Mangelli M, et al. Torsional properties of pathfinding instruments. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endodontology. 2011;112(5):667–70.