ArticleRestorative dentistry & endodontics2025
Shaping ability and cyclic fatigue resistance between Genius ProFlex, ZenFlex, and TruNatomy rotary systems: an experimental study.
Article in Restorative dentistry & endodontics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Influence of kinematic motion and instrumentation strategy on apical debris extrusion during root canal preparation: AnJournal of conservative dentistry and endodontics · 2026Article
- In vitro assessment of integrated apex locator systems: working length accuracy, operational parameters, and mechanical effects on NiTi instruments.Journal of clinical and experimental dentistry · 2026Review
- Impact of metallurgical and geometric characteristics on cyclic fatigue resistance of three thermally treated NiTi rotary instruments.Journal of clinical and experimental dentistry · 2026Review
- Comparison of Shaping Ability and Apical Debris Extrusion Using 4 Different Nickel-Titanium Single-File Systems.International journal of biomaterials · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Objectives: The aim of this study was to investigate the efficacy of three newly introduced rotary endodontic systems: Genius ProFlex (Medidenta), TruNatomy (Dentsply Maillefer), and ZenFlex (Kerr). Methods: Forty-five mandibular molars with root canal curvatures <5° were utilized. Micro-computed tomography scans were performed pre- and post-preparation to assess apical transportation, centralization, percentage of dentin wear, and canal volume alterations. Eight instruments of each diameter underwent cyclic fatigue testing. Results: The percentage of dentin wear on mesial and distal walls showed no significant differences among ZenFlex, TruNatomy, and Genius ProFlex at 1, 2, 3, and 4 mm from the apical foramen and root canal orifice (p > 0.05). Centering ability varied in the mesiolingual canal (p < 0.05). No notable differences were observed in transportation (p > 0.05). Genius ProFlex demonstrated lower volumetric changes (p < 0.05). There were significant differences in cyclic fatigue, with higher values for Genius ProFlex and lower values for TruNatomy (p < 0.05). Conclusions: The three nickel-titanium rotary instruments are safe and efficient for root canal preparation, with Genius ProFlex exhibiting superior cyclic fatigue resistance.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.