Reciprocating Kinematics of X-Smart Plus, VDW Silver and, iRoot Endodontic Motors: A Comparison Between Real and Set Values
Autor(a) principal: | |
---|---|
Data de Publicação: | 2022 |
Outros Autores: | , , , |
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 |