Burkhardt L, Weidmann F, Rüttermann S,
Gerhardt-Szep S. Comparison of the shaping ability of
RaCe, FlexMaster, and ProFile nickel-titanium instruments in severely curved root
canals. J Clin Exp Dent.
2016;8(5):e523-8.
doi:10.4317/jced.52838
References
|
1. Peters OA. Current
challenges and concepts in the preparation of root canal systems: a review. J Endod. 2004;30:559-67. |
|
|
|
|
|
2. Plotino
G, Testarelli L, Al-Sudani
D, Pongione G, Grande NM, Gambarini
G. Fatigue resistance of rotary instruments manufactured using different
nickel-titanium alloys: a comparative study. Odontology. 2014;102:31-5. |
|
|
|
|
|
3. Haji-Hassani
N, Bakhshi M, Shahabi S.Frequency of Iatrogenic Errors through Root Canal Treatment
Procedure in 1335 Charts of Dental Patients. J Int
Oral Health. 2015;7:14-7. |
|
|
|
|
|
4. Yousuf
W, Khan M, Mehdi H. Endodontic Procedural Errors:
Frequency, Type of Error, and the Most Frequently Treated Tooth. Int J Dent. 2015;2015:673914. |
|
|
|
|
|
5. Tortini
D, Colombo M, Gagliani M. Apical crown technique to
model canal roots. A review of the literature. Minerva Stomatol.
2007;56:445-59. |
|
|
|
|
|
6. Plotino
G, Grande NM, Cordaro M, Testarelli
L, Gambarini G. A review of cyclic fatigue testing
of nickel-titanium rotary instruments. J Endod. 2009;35:1469-76. |
|
|
|
|
|
7. Homayoon
A, Hamidi MR, Haddadi A, Madani ZS, Moudi E, Bijani A. Comparing the Coronal Flaring Efficacy of Five
Different Instruments Using Cone-Beam Computed Tomography. Iran Endod J. 2015;10:263-7. |
|
|
|
|
|
8. Sharma SA, Tyagi SP, Sinha DJ, Singh UP,
Chandra P, Kaur G. Influence ofcervical
preflaring using different rotary instruments on
the accuracy of apical file size determination: A comparative in-vitro study.
J Conserv Dent. 2014;17:575-8. |
|
|
|
|
|
9. Duran-Sindreu F, García M, Olivieri JG, Mercadé M, Morelló S, Roig M. A comparison
of apical transportation between FlexMaster and
Twisted Files rotary instruments. J Endod.
2012;38:993-5. |
|
|
|
|
|
10. Schäfer
E, Oitzinger M. Cutting efficiency of five
different types of rotary nickel-titanium instruments. J Endod. 2008;34:198-200. |
|
|
|
|
|
11. Schirrmeister
JF, Strohl C, Altenburger
MJ, Wrbas KT, Hellwig E.
Shaping ability and safety of five different rotary nickel-titanium
instruments compared with stainless steel hand instrumentation in simulated
curved root canals. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2006;101:807-13. |
|
|
|
|
|
12. Shahi
S, Yavari HR, Rahimi S, Reyhani MF, Kamarroosta Z, Abdolrahimi M. A comparative scanning electron
microscopic study of the effect of three different rotary instruments on
smear layer formation. J
Oral Sci. 2009;51:55-60. |
|
|
|
|
|
13. Zarrabi
MH, Bidar M, Jafarzadeh
H. An in vitro comparative study of apically extruded debris resulting from
conventional and three rotary (Profile, Race, FlexMaster)
instrumentation techniques. J Oral Sci. 2006;48:85-8. |
|
|
|
|
|
14. Schneider SW. A
comparison of canal preparations in straight and curved root canals. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol. 1971;32:271-5. PMid:5284110 |
|
|
|
|
|
15. Bramante CM, Berbert A, Borges RP. A methodology for evaluation of
root canal instrumentation. J Endod. 1987;13:243-5. PMid:3473181 |
|
|
|
|
|
16. Paqué
F, Musch U, Hulsmann M.
Comparison of root canal preparation using RaCe and
ProTaper rotary Ni-Ti instruments. Int Endod J. 2005;38:8-16. |
|
|
|
|
|
17. Paque
F, Zehnder M, De-Deus G. Microtomography-based
comparison of reciprocating single-file F2 ProTaper
technique versus rotary full sequence. J Endod.
2011;37:1394-7. |
|
|
|
|
|
18. Peters OA, Laib A, Rüegsegger P, Barbakow F. Three-dimensional analysis of root canal
geometry by high-resolution computed tomography. J Dent Res. 2000;79:1405-9. |
|
|
|
|
|
19.
Grande NM, Plotino G, Gambarini
G, Testarelli L, D'Ambrosio
F, Pecci R, et al. Present and future in the use of micro-CT scanner 3D analysis for the
study of dental and root canal morphology. Ann Ist
Super Sanita. 2012;48:26-34. |
|
|
|
|
|
20. Schäfer
E, Vlassis M. Comparative investigation of two
rotary nickel-titanium instruments: ProTaper versus
RaCe. Part 1. Shaping ability in simulated curved
canals. Int Endod J. 2004;37:229-38. |
|
|
|
|
|
21. Schäfer
E, Vlassis M. Comparative investigation of two
rotary nickel-titanium instruments: ProTaper versus
RaCe. Part 2. Cleaning effectiveness and shaping
ability in severely curved root canals of extracted teeth. Int Endod J. 2004;37:239-48. |
|
|
|
|
|
22. Suneelkumar
C, Savarimalai Karumaran
C, Ramachandran S, Indira
R, Shankar P, Kumar A. A comparative study on the shaping ability of k3,
profile and protaper instruments in simulated
curved root canals. Iran Endod J. 2010;5:107-12. |
|
|
|
|
|
23. Sadeghi
S. Shaping ability of NiTi rotary versus stainless
steel hand instruments in simulated curved canals. Med Oral Patol
Oral Cir Bucal. 2011;16:e454-8. |
|
|
|
|
|
24. Montenegro-Santillan R, Alegre-Domingo T, Faus-Matoses V, Faus-Llacer V.
An in vitro comparison of cyclic fatigue resistance of ProTaper
universal and GT series X files. Med Oral Patol
Oral Cir Bucal. 2013;18:e533-6. |
|
|
|
|
|
25. Martin-Micó M, Forner-Navarro L, Almenar-Garcia A. Modification of the working length
after rotary instrumentation: a comparative study of four systems. Med Oral Patol
Oral Cir Bucal. 2009;14:E153-7. |
|
|
|
|
|
26. Thompson SA, Dummer PM. Shaping ability of Hero 642 rotary
nickel-titanium instruments in simulated root canals: Part 2. Int Endod J. 2000;33:255-61. PMid:11307444 |
|
|
|
|
|
27. Khalilak
Z, Fallahdoost A, Dadresanfar
B, Rezvani G.Comparison
of extracted teeth and simulated resin blocks on apical canal transportation.
Iran Endod J. 2008;3:109-12. |
|
|
|
|
|
28. Hübscher
W, Barbakow F, Peters OA. Root-canal preparation
with FlexMaster: canal shapes analysed
by micro-computed tomography. Int Endod J. 2003;36:740-7. |
|
|
|
|
|
29. Schäfer
E, Schulz-Bongert U, Tulus
G. Comparison of hand stainless steel and nickel titanium rotary
instrumentation: a clinical study. J Endod.
2004;30:432-5. |
|
30. Yared GM, Bou Dagher FE, Machtou P. Failure of ProFile
instruments used with high and low torque motors. Int
Endod J. 2001;34:471-5.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2591.2001.00420.x
PMid:11556515