Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jun 13, 2026
Cutting Procedures, Tensile Testing, and Ageing of Flexible Unidirectional Composite Laminates
Published on: April 27, 2019
Cutting efficiency of 3 different instrument designs used in reciprocation
Jeffrey Wan1, Brian J Rasimick, Barry L Musikant
1Essential Dental Laboratories, South Hackensack, NJ, USA. jwan@edsdental.com
Objective:
This study examined the effect of flute number and cross-sectional area on the cutting efficiency of 3 reciprocating endodontic instruments twisted from rectangular stainless steel wire; 40/0.02 instruments at 25-mm length were compared.
Study Design:
Seventy-five anterior teeth were prepared, divided into 3 groups, and operated on with a reciprocating handpiece at 2500 rpm for 5 seconds at around 500 grams of force: Group 1, SafeSiders; Group 2, Dentsply K-Files; Group 3, Dentsply K-Reamers. Dentin generated was collected in weigh dishes. Cutting efficiency was determined by dentin weight. Statistical analysis was performed with 1-way ANOVA and the Student-Neuman-Keuls (SNK) multiple comparisons testing.
Results:
SafeSider instruments produced a greater amount of debris than K-Files and K-Reamers (P < .026). K-Files and K-Reamers were not statistically different (P = .63).
Conclusions:
Flute number had no effect on cutting efficiency. Cross-sectional area may be a determining factor on cutting efficiency.
