Related Experiment Video
Updated: Feb 26, 2026

Scanning Electron Microscopic Evaluation of Surface Defects of Remover Retreatment File After Single and Multiple Uses
Published on: October 11, 2024
Torsional resistance of XP-endo Shaper at body temperature compared with several nickel-titanium rotary instruments
1Department of Endodontics, Mansoura, Egypt.
Aim:
To compare the torsional resistance of XP-endo Shaper (XPS; size 30, .01 taper, FKG Dentaire, La Chaux-de-Fonds, Switzerland) instruments at body temperature with TRUShape (TRS; size 30, .06 taper, Dentsply Tulsa Dental Specialties, Tulsa, OK, USA), ProFile Vortex (PV; size 30, .04 taper, Dentsply Tulsa Dental Specialties) and FlexMaster (FM; size 30, .04 taper, VDW GmbH, Munich, Germany) nickel-titanium rotary instruments.
Methodology:
A metal block with a square-shaped mould (5 mm × 5 mm × 5 mm) was positioned inside a glass container. Five millimetres of the tip of each instrument was held inside the metal block by filling the mould with a resin composite. The instruments were tested for torsional resistance in saline solution at 37 °C. Data were analysed using one-way analysis of variance (anova) and Tukey post hoc tests. The significance level was set at P < 0.05.
Results:
FM had the greatest torsional resistance amongst the instruments tested (P < 0.001). There was no significant difference between FM and PV instruments (P = 0.211). The ranking for torsional resistance values was: FM > PV > TRS > XPS.
Conclusions:
FlexMaster and ProFile Vortex instruments were more resistant to torsional stress compared with TRUShape and XP-endo Shaper instruments. The manufacturing process used to produce XP-endo Shaper instruments did not enhance their resistance to torsional stress as compared with the other instruments.
More Related Videos
Related Concept Videos
Residual Stresses in Circular Shafts
Temperature Dependent Deformation
Circular Shafts - Elastoplastic Materials
As torque on the...
Thin-Walled Hollow Shafts

