Reciprocation with different motions: an in vitro comparative study

A new clinical motion, designed to improve the safety and efficiency of NiTi instrumentation, has been proposed and positively evaluated in several studies: the “MIMERACI” technique. In the present study, the aforementioned technique was tested with a single-file reciprocating instrumentation system...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Vittorio Franco, Maya Feghali, Rosalie Chakra, Mohammed Hammo, Valentina Vincenzi, Kadriye Ozdayi, Hyeon-Cheol Kim, Massimo Galli, Gabriele Miccoli
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Publymed 2024-04-01
Series:Annali di Stomatologia
Online Access:https://www.annalidistomatologia.eu/ads/article/view/359/351
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
_version_ 1832577685344223232
author Vittorio Franco
Maya Feghali
Rosalie Chakra
Mohammed Hammo
Valentina Vincenzi
Kadriye Ozdayi
Hyeon-Cheol Kim
Massimo Galli
Gabriele Miccoli
author_facet Vittorio Franco
Maya Feghali
Rosalie Chakra
Mohammed Hammo
Valentina Vincenzi
Kadriye Ozdayi
Hyeon-Cheol Kim
Massimo Galli
Gabriele Miccoli
author_sort Vittorio Franco
collection DOAJ
description A new clinical motion, designed to improve the safety and efficiency of NiTi instrumentation, has been proposed and positively evaluated in several studies: the “MIMERACI” technique. In the present study, the aforementioned technique was tested with a single-file reciprocating instrumentation system: EdgeOneR Utopia (Edge Endo, Albuquerque, New Mexico). The aim of the study was to determine whether the MIMERACI technique could reduce instrumentation stress (specifically torsional loads) by analyzing operative torque and comparing it to the traditional pecking motions recommended by manufacturers. Twenty instruments were randomly divided into two groups of 10 each. Each instrument in both groups was used to instrument one artificial 3D upper molar tooth. All teeth had identical anatomy, and three canals were instrumented to ensure proper visualization. Group 1 instrumented the canals using the MIMERACI technique, while Group 2 used a pecking motion (21) (1–2 mm amplitude) with a series of three pecking strokes. A video camera mounted on a tripod continuously filmed and recorded both the instrument’s progression inside the canal and the torque displayed by the motor. Torque values for both groups were recorded and transferred to an Excel sheet (measured every 1/10 second). Data were statistically analyzed using ANOVA and Tukey’s test at a 5% significance level. Group 1 (MIMERACI) demonstrated significantly lower average torque values (mean 0.25 N, SD 0.1) compared to Group 2 (pecking motion), which showed higher values (mean 0.45 N, SD 0.15). The maximum torque peak recorded was 1.4 N for the MIMERACI group and 2.2 N for the pecking motion group.
format Article
id doaj-art-90dc35b4e910495bbb14159255943dff
institution Kabale University
issn 1971-1441
language English
publishDate 2024-04-01
publisher Publymed
record_format Article
series Annali di Stomatologia
spelling doaj-art-90dc35b4e910495bbb14159255943dff2025-01-30T18:19:40ZengPublymedAnnali di Stomatologia1971-14412024-04-0115421722110.59987/ads/2024.4.217-221ads2404-217-221Reciprocation with different motions: an in vitro comparative studyVittorio Franco0Maya Feghali1Rosalie Chakra2Mohammed Hammo3Valentina Vincenzi4Kadriye Ozdayi5Hyeon-Cheol Kim6Massimo Galli7Gabriele Miccoli8Private practitioner, UKPrivate practitioner, FrancePrivate practitioner, LebanonPrivate practitioner, JordanPrivate practitioner, ItalyPrivate practitioner, TurkeyPusan National University, KoreaSapienza, University of Rome, ItalySapienza, University of Rome, ItalyA new clinical motion, designed to improve the safety and efficiency of NiTi instrumentation, has been proposed and positively evaluated in several studies: the “MIMERACI” technique. In the present study, the aforementioned technique was tested with a single-file reciprocating instrumentation system: EdgeOneR Utopia (Edge Endo, Albuquerque, New Mexico). The aim of the study was to determine whether the MIMERACI technique could reduce instrumentation stress (specifically torsional loads) by analyzing operative torque and comparing it to the traditional pecking motions recommended by manufacturers. Twenty instruments were randomly divided into two groups of 10 each. Each instrument in both groups was used to instrument one artificial 3D upper molar tooth. All teeth had identical anatomy, and three canals were instrumented to ensure proper visualization. Group 1 instrumented the canals using the MIMERACI technique, while Group 2 used a pecking motion (21) (1–2 mm amplitude) with a series of three pecking strokes. A video camera mounted on a tripod continuously filmed and recorded both the instrument’s progression inside the canal and the torque displayed by the motor. Torque values for both groups were recorded and transferred to an Excel sheet (measured every 1/10 second). Data were statistically analyzed using ANOVA and Tukey’s test at a 5% significance level. Group 1 (MIMERACI) demonstrated significantly lower average torque values (mean 0.25 N, SD 0.1) compared to Group 2 (pecking motion), which showed higher values (mean 0.45 N, SD 0.15). The maximum torque peak recorded was 1.4 N for the MIMERACI group and 2.2 N for the pecking motion group.https://www.annalidistomatologia.eu/ads/article/view/359/351
spellingShingle Vittorio Franco
Maya Feghali
Rosalie Chakra
Mohammed Hammo
Valentina Vincenzi
Kadriye Ozdayi
Hyeon-Cheol Kim
Massimo Galli
Gabriele Miccoli
Reciprocation with different motions: an in vitro comparative study
Annali di Stomatologia
title Reciprocation with different motions: an in vitro comparative study
title_full Reciprocation with different motions: an in vitro comparative study
title_fullStr Reciprocation with different motions: an in vitro comparative study
title_full_unstemmed Reciprocation with different motions: an in vitro comparative study
title_short Reciprocation with different motions: an in vitro comparative study
title_sort reciprocation with different motions an in vitro comparative study
url https://www.annalidistomatologia.eu/ads/article/view/359/351
work_keys_str_mv AT vittoriofranco reciprocationwithdifferentmotionsaninvitrocomparativestudy
AT mayafeghali reciprocationwithdifferentmotionsaninvitrocomparativestudy
AT rosaliechakra reciprocationwithdifferentmotionsaninvitrocomparativestudy
AT mohammedhammo reciprocationwithdifferentmotionsaninvitrocomparativestudy
AT valentinavincenzi reciprocationwithdifferentmotionsaninvitrocomparativestudy
AT kadriyeozdayi reciprocationwithdifferentmotionsaninvitrocomparativestudy
AT hyeoncheolkim reciprocationwithdifferentmotionsaninvitrocomparativestudy
AT massimogalli reciprocationwithdifferentmotionsaninvitrocomparativestudy
AT gabrielemiccoli reciprocationwithdifferentmotionsaninvitrocomparativestudy