Assessment of the fracture resistance of teeth instrumented using 2 rotary and 2 reciprocating files versus the Self-Adjusting File (SAF): An ex vivo comparative study on mandibular premolars.

Abstract

Aim:Current ex vivo study compared fracture resistance of teeth instrumented using 5 endodontic files, filled with Gutta-percha and AH Plus.Materials and Methods:Sixty freshly extracted, single-rooted mandibular premolars were acquired and decoronated to obtain 15 mm segments. These samples were randomly divided into six groups (n = 10). Group 1 served as the control containing untreated samples (without instrumentation or filling). In Groups 2-6, samples were instrumented using rotary (Universal ProTaper and Revo-S), reciprocating (WaveOne and RECIPROC®), and self-adjusting file (SAF), respectively. Following instrumentation, the samples were filled by lateral compaction with Gutta-percha and AH Plus. A week later, after the sealer was completely set, a vertical load was applied to the specimen's canal in each group until fracture. The loads required for fracture were recorded, and statistical analysis was performed.Results:The mean fracture load differed significantly among the groups (P < 0.01; one-way ANOVA). Tukey's post-hoc tests revealed that the fracture resistance was similar in the control and SAF groups (P > 0.05) and was significantly higher than that of the 2 rotary and reciprocating groups (P < 0.01).Conclusion:The samples instrumented by the SAF exhibited a better fracture resistance.