Reciprocating Kinematics of X-Smart Plus, VDW Silver and, iRoot Endodontic Motors: A Comparison Between Real and Set Values

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: Braambati,Dieimes
Data de Publicação: 2022
Outros Autores: Monteiro Netto,Renata de Castro, Coelho,Marcelo Santos, Soares,Adriana de Jesus, Frozoni,Marcos
Tipo de documento: Artigo
Idioma: eng
Título da fonte: Brazilian Dental Journal
Texto Completo: http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0103-64402022000600028
Resumo: Abstract This study assessed 3 endodontic motors, X-Smart Plus (Dentsply Sirona, Ballaigues, Switzerland), VDW.Silver Reciproc (VDW GmbH, München, Germany) and, iRoot (Bassi Endodontics, Belo Horizonte, Brazil) in 2 different reciprocating settings. The movements evaluated were 170° in counter-clockwise (CCW) and 50° in clockwise (CW) at 350 RPM, and 150° CCW and 30° CW at 300 RPM. For the X-Smart Plus and VDW Silver the settings used were the ones in the motor library. For the iRoot, the motor was adjusted to the angles of the study. A customized optic target was attached to the contra-angle of the motor and the movements were recorded with a high-resolution camera (K2 DistaMaxTM Long-Distance Microscope System, Infinity Photo-Optical Company, Colorado, EUA) at 2,400 frames per second (FPS). The images were analyzed with the Vision Research software (Inc. Headquarters, Wayne, New Jersey, EUA). The following kinematic parameters were assessed: CCW angle, CW angle, speed (RPM) at both directions, and, standstill time at each change of directions. The Intraclass Correlation Coefficient (ICC) and Kruskal-Wallis (method of Dunn) were used at a significant level of 5%. There was no statistically significant difference among the motors at the 150°/30° setting (P > .05); the iRoot was the least reliable at the 170°/50° setting for CCW angle, speed, and net angle parameters (P < 0.05). The standstill time of all motors in both directions was identical. None of the motors were able to reproduce faithfully the set movements. The iRoot motor presented a higher discrepancy when compared to X-Smart and VDW Silver.
id FUNORP-1_46caa3d8bd3875e4dce5ddbd44200152
oai_identifier_str oai:scielo:S0103-64402022000600028
network_acronym_str FUNORP-1
network_name_str Brazilian Dental Journal
repository_id_str
spelling Reciprocating Kinematics of X-Smart Plus, VDW Silver and, iRoot Endodontic Motors: A Comparison Between Real and Set ValuesReciprocatingendodontic motorkinematicsvideo analysisAbstract This study assessed 3 endodontic motors, X-Smart Plus (Dentsply Sirona, Ballaigues, Switzerland), VDW.Silver Reciproc (VDW GmbH, München, Germany) and, iRoot (Bassi Endodontics, Belo Horizonte, Brazil) in 2 different reciprocating settings. The movements evaluated were 170° in counter-clockwise (CCW) and 50° in clockwise (CW) at 350 RPM, and 150° CCW and 30° CW at 300 RPM. For the X-Smart Plus and VDW Silver the settings used were the ones in the motor library. For the iRoot, the motor was adjusted to the angles of the study. A customized optic target was attached to the contra-angle of the motor and the movements were recorded with a high-resolution camera (K2 DistaMaxTM Long-Distance Microscope System, Infinity Photo-Optical Company, Colorado, EUA) at 2,400 frames per second (FPS). The images were analyzed with the Vision Research software (Inc. Headquarters, Wayne, New Jersey, EUA). The following kinematic parameters were assessed: CCW angle, CW angle, speed (RPM) at both directions, and, standstill time at each change of directions. The Intraclass Correlation Coefficient (ICC) and Kruskal-Wallis (method of Dunn) were used at a significant level of 5%. There was no statistically significant difference among the motors at the 150°/30° setting (P > .05); the iRoot was the least reliable at the 170°/50° setting for CCW angle, speed, and net angle parameters (P < 0.05). The standstill time of all motors in both directions was identical. None of the motors were able to reproduce faithfully the set movements. The iRoot motor presented a higher discrepancy when compared to X-Smart and VDW Silver.Fundação Odontológica de Ribeirão Preto2022-12-01info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersiontext/htmlhttp://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0103-64402022000600028Brazilian Dental Journal v.33 n.6 2022reponame:Brazilian Dental Journalinstname:Fundação Odontológica de Ribeirão Preto (FUNORP)instacron:FUNORP10.1590/0103-6440202204855info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessBraambati,DieimesMonteiro Netto,Renata de CastroCoelho,Marcelo SantosSoares,Adriana de JesusFrozoni,Marcoseng2022-12-01T00:00:00Zoai:scielo:S0103-64402022000600028Revistahttps://www.scielo.br/j/bdj/https://old.scielo.br/oai/scielo-oai.phpbdj@forp.usp.br||sergio@fosjc.unesp.br1806-47600103-6440opendoar:2022-12-01T00:00Brazilian Dental Journal - Fundação Odontológica de Ribeirão Preto (FUNORP)false
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Reciprocating Kinematics of X-Smart Plus, VDW Silver and, iRoot Endodontic Motors: A Comparison Between Real and Set Values
title Reciprocating Kinematics of X-Smart Plus, VDW Silver and, iRoot Endodontic Motors: A Comparison Between Real and Set Values
spellingShingle Reciprocating Kinematics of X-Smart Plus, VDW Silver and, iRoot Endodontic Motors: A Comparison Between Real and Set Values
Braambati,Dieimes
Reciprocating
endodontic motor
kinematics
video analysis
title_short Reciprocating Kinematics of X-Smart Plus, VDW Silver and, iRoot Endodontic Motors: A Comparison Between Real and Set Values
title_full Reciprocating Kinematics of X-Smart Plus, VDW Silver and, iRoot Endodontic Motors: A Comparison Between Real and Set Values
title_fullStr Reciprocating Kinematics of X-Smart Plus, VDW Silver and, iRoot Endodontic Motors: A Comparison Between Real and Set Values
title_full_unstemmed Reciprocating Kinematics of X-Smart Plus, VDW Silver and, iRoot Endodontic Motors: A Comparison Between Real and Set Values
title_sort Reciprocating Kinematics of X-Smart Plus, VDW Silver and, iRoot Endodontic Motors: A Comparison Between Real and Set Values
author Braambati,Dieimes
author_facet Braambati,Dieimes
Monteiro Netto,Renata de Castro
Coelho,Marcelo Santos
Soares,Adriana de Jesus
Frozoni,Marcos
author_role author
author2 Monteiro Netto,Renata de Castro
Coelho,Marcelo Santos
Soares,Adriana de Jesus
Frozoni,Marcos
author2_role author
author
author
author
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv Braambati,Dieimes
Monteiro Netto,Renata de Castro
Coelho,Marcelo Santos
Soares,Adriana de Jesus
Frozoni,Marcos
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv Reciprocating
endodontic motor
kinematics
video analysis
topic Reciprocating
endodontic motor
kinematics
video analysis
description Abstract This study assessed 3 endodontic motors, X-Smart Plus (Dentsply Sirona, Ballaigues, Switzerland), VDW.Silver Reciproc (VDW GmbH, München, Germany) and, iRoot (Bassi Endodontics, Belo Horizonte, Brazil) in 2 different reciprocating settings. The movements evaluated were 170° in counter-clockwise (CCW) and 50° in clockwise (CW) at 350 RPM, and 150° CCW and 30° CW at 300 RPM. For the X-Smart Plus and VDW Silver the settings used were the ones in the motor library. For the iRoot, the motor was adjusted to the angles of the study. A customized optic target was attached to the contra-angle of the motor and the movements were recorded with a high-resolution camera (K2 DistaMaxTM Long-Distance Microscope System, Infinity Photo-Optical Company, Colorado, EUA) at 2,400 frames per second (FPS). The images were analyzed with the Vision Research software (Inc. Headquarters, Wayne, New Jersey, EUA). The following kinematic parameters were assessed: CCW angle, CW angle, speed (RPM) at both directions, and, standstill time at each change of directions. The Intraclass Correlation Coefficient (ICC) and Kruskal-Wallis (method of Dunn) were used at a significant level of 5%. There was no statistically significant difference among the motors at the 150°/30° setting (P > .05); the iRoot was the least reliable at the 170°/50° setting for CCW angle, speed, and net angle parameters (P < 0.05). The standstill time of all motors in both directions was identical. None of the motors were able to reproduce faithfully the set movements. The iRoot motor presented a higher discrepancy when compared to X-Smart and VDW Silver.
publishDate 2022
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2022-12-01
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0103-64402022000600028
url http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0103-64402022000600028
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv eng
language eng
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv 10.1590/0103-6440202204855
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv text/html
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Fundação Odontológica de Ribeirão Preto
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Fundação Odontológica de Ribeirão Preto
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv Brazilian Dental Journal v.33 n.6 2022
reponame:Brazilian Dental Journal
instname:Fundação Odontológica de Ribeirão Preto (FUNORP)
instacron:FUNORP
instname_str Fundação Odontológica de Ribeirão Preto (FUNORP)
instacron_str FUNORP
institution FUNORP
reponame_str Brazilian Dental Journal
collection Brazilian Dental Journal
repository.name.fl_str_mv Brazilian Dental Journal - Fundação Odontológica de Ribeirão Preto (FUNORP)
repository.mail.fl_str_mv bdj@forp.usp.br||sergio@fosjc.unesp.br
_version_ 1754204096718438400