ReviewJournal of clinical and experimental dentistry2026
Cyclic fatigue resistance of two NiTi rotary instruments after blue heat treatment.
Review in Journal of clinical and experimental dentistry, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: This study evaluated the cyclic fatigue resistance of two blue heat-treated rotary instruments. Thirty files (15 Eflex Blue and 15 BlueShaper) activated by an E-CONNECT motor at 350 RPM with a 2.5 N torque were evaluated. Material and Methods: A stainless-steel device with three different curvatures (25°, 45°, and 90°) was fixed to a SHIMADZU tensile testing machine to measure cyclic fatigue. The instruments were placed on the motor at a constant speed, then on the testing device; the time to each instrument's fracture was recorded. Tension, time, and instrument deformation were measured. Data were analyzed using the Shapiro-Wilk and Kruskal-Wallis tests at a 5% significance level. Results: Eflex Blue files demonstrated superior tensile strength and stability over time, particularly at a 25° curvature (p < 0.05). Performance was comparable between the two files at 45° and 90° curvatures, with no significant differences in deformation percentage. Conclusions: Eflex Blue files demonstrated greater cyclic fatigue resistance than BlueShaper, especially at smaller curvatures (25°). Although both systems exhibited similar deformation rates, the fracture resistance of both files decreased as curvature increased, reaching a critical threshold at 90°.
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.