ArticleEuropean endodontic journal2025
Comparative Buckling Strength and Metallurgical Analysis of Five Classic NiTi Endodontic Rotary Files.
Article in European endodontic journal, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Evaluation of bending test, cyclic fatigue, and buckling resistance test using rotary Nickel-Titanium files of three types: AnJournal of conservative dentistry and endodontics · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveNickel-titanium (NiTi) rotary instruments have revolutionized endodontic practice through continuous advancements in metallurgy and design. Despite these improvements, mechanical failure remains a clinical concern. This study aimed to evaluate and compare the design features, metallurgical properties, and buckling resistance of five widely used NiTi rotary endodontic systems.
methodsA total of 250 new NiTi rotary instruments from five systems (ProTaper Next, Mtwo, ProFile, EndoSequence, and GT Series X) were analyzed. Design features were assessed using dental microscopy and scanning electron microscopy. Metallurgical properties were evaluated through energy-dispersive X-ray spectroscopy and differential scanning calorimetry. Buckling resistance was measured using a universal testing machine equipped with a 1 kN load cell, applying a compressive load at 1 mm/min until 1 mm of lateral displacement was achieved. Statistical analysis was performed using the Shapiro-Wilk test to assess normality, followed by the non-parametric Kruskal-Wallis test to compare groups. A significance level of p<0.05 was adopted.
resultsProFile instruments exhibited the highest number of spirals (19) and spiral density (1.19 spirals/mm), while GT Series X featured the shortest cutting blade length (≤12 mm). All systems demonstrated near-equiatomic nickel-titanium ratios. ProTaper Next and GT Series X showed higher R-phase and austenitic transformation temperatures. Buckling resistance was significantly greater in the ProFile (0.04 and 0.06 taper) and EndoSequence 35/.06 and 40/.06 instruments (p<0.05). In contrast, EndoSequence 0.04 files, Mtwo, and ProTaper Next exhibited lower resistance.
conclusionDesign features, taper, and metallurgical composition significantly influence the buckling resistance of NiTi rotary endodontic instruments.
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.