title: An in vitro comparison of cyclic fatigue resistance of ProTaper universal and GT series X files.
abstract: OBJECTIVE
  The aim of this study was to compare the cyclic fatigue resistance of two nickel-titanium (NiTi) endodontic instruments from ProTaper and GT series X files.
  
  
  METHODS
  Cyclic fatigue test was realized with instruments from ProTaper: F1 and F3 (Denstply Maillefer, Ballaigues, Switzerland) and GT-X: 20.06 and 30.08 (Dentsply Tulsa Dental, Tulsa, Oklahoma, United States of America). A total of 320 instruments were rotated in 4 curved artificial canals with different angles and radius of curvature. The time and cycles to failure were calculated. The data was compared using a Mann-Whitney, Kruskall-Wallis, and Kolmogorov-Smirnov tests, with a significance level of p<0.05.
  
  
  RESULTS
  GT-X files rotated for a significantly longer period of time before separation occurred, thus GT-X files where more resistant to the cyclic fatigue compared with ProTaper.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  GT-X files have a greater resistance to cyclic fatigue, this fact can be caused by the use of the Ni-Ti alloy "M-Wire".
authors: Master of Restorative Dentistry and Endodontics, Valencia University Medical and Dental School, Valencia, Spain.
authors: Ramiro
authors: R
authors: Montenegro-Santillán
authors: Teresa
authors: T
authors: Alegre-Domingo
authors: Vicente
authors: V
authors: Faus-Matoses
authors: Vicente
authors: V
authors: Faus-Llácer
mesh_terms: D003762:Dental Instruments; D004867:Equipment Design; D009532:Nickel; D013314:Stress, Mechanical; D014025:Titanium
chemical_list: C040654:titanium nickelide; D009532:Nickel; D014025:Titanium
references: J Endod. 2000 Mar;26(3):161-5
references: 11199711
references: J Endod. 1988 Jul;14(7):346-51
references: 3251996
references: Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2000 Oct;90(4):500-6
references: 11027388
references: J Endod. 2007 Jan;33(1):52-4
references: 17185131
references: J Endod. 2010 Apr;36(4):741-4
references: 20307756
references: J Endod. 2007 Jun;33(6):737-41
references: 17509417
references: J Endod. 2006 Nov;32(11):1048-52
references: 17055904
references: J Endod. 2009 Mar;35(3):401-3
references: 19249604
references: J Endod. 2005 Jan;31(1):40-3
references: 15614004
references: J Endod. 2009 Sep;35(9):1278-81
references: 19720231
references: J Endod. 1997 Feb;23(2):77-85
references: 9220735
references: J Endod. 2007 Jan;33(1):55-7
references: 17185132
references: Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2007 Dec;104(6):837-40
references: 17904394
references: J Endod. 2009 Mar;35(3):404-7
references: 19249605
references: Int Endod J. 2001 Jul;34(5):354-8
references: 11482718
references: J Endod. 1995 Mar;21(3):146-51
references: 7561658
references: Dent Today. 2008 Jan;27(1):70, 72, 74 passim
references: 18240635
references: J Endod. 2004 Jun;30(6):410-2
references: 15167468
references: J Endod. 2010 Feb;36(2):305-7
references: 20113796
references: Dent Today. 2001 Nov;20(11):58-64, 66-8
references: 11715650
references: J Endod. 1999 Jun;25(6):434-40
references: 10530246
references: J Endod. 2008 Aug;34(8):1003-5
references: 18634935
references: J Endod. 2004 Oct;30(10):722-5
references: 15448468
references: Int Endod J. 2006 Oct;39(10):755-63
references: 16948660