Evaluation of the Resistance to Cyclic Fatigue among ProTaper Next, ProTaper Universal, and Vortex Blue Rotary Instruments

IntroductionThe purpose of this study was to compare the fracture resistance to cyclic fatigue of ProTaper Next (PTN; Dentsply Tulsa Dental Specialties, Tulsa, OK), ProTaper Universal (PTU, Dentsply Tulsa Dental Specialties), and Vortex Blue (VB, Dentsply Tulsa Dental Specialties) rotary instruments.MethodsTwenty instruments each of PTN X1–X5, PTU S1–F5, and VB 20/04–50/04 were rotated until fracture in a simulated canal of 90° and a 5-mm radius using a custom-made testing platform. The number of cycles to fracture (NCF) was calculated. Weibull analysis was used to predict the maximum number of cycles when 99% of the instrument samples survive.ResultsVB 20/04–30/04 had significantly higher NCF than PTU S1–F5 and PTN X1–X5. VB 35/04–45/04 had significantly higher NCF than PTU S2–F5 and PTN X2–X5. PTN X1 had higher NCF than PTU S1–F5. PTN X2 had higher NCF than PTU F2–F5. The Weibull distribution predicted the highest number of cycles at which 99% of instruments survive to be 766 cycles for VB 25/04 and the lowest to be 50 cycles for PTU F2.ConclusionsUnder the limitations of this study, VB 20/04–45/04 were more resistant to cyclic fatigue than PTN X2–X5 and PTU S2–F5. PTN X1 and X2 were more resistant to cyclic fatigue than PTU F2–F5. The Weibull distribution appears to be a feasible and potentially clinically relevant model to predict resistance to cyclic fatigue.