Basic Research—Technology
Cyclic Fatigue Resistance of Reciproc Blue and
Reciproc Files in an S-shaped Canal
H€
useyin Sinan Topçuo glu, DDS, PhD†
glu, DDS, PhD,* and Gamze Topçuo
Abstract
Introduction: This study evaluated the cyclic fatigue
resistance (CFR) of Reciproc (R25 and R40; VDW,
Munich, Germany) and Reciproc Blue (R25 and R40,
S ingle-file nickel-titanium
VDW) instruments used in an artificial S-shaped canal.
Methods: A total of 80 files were tested in an S-shaped
canal (n = 20 for each file, Reciproc R25 and R40 and
Reciproc Blue R25 and R40). This study compared Recip-
roc R25 with Reciproc Blue R25 files and Reciproc R40
with Reciproc Blue R40 files. All files were rotated in
an S-shaped artificial canal until fracture. CFR was deter-
mined by recording the time to fracture in the artificial
canal. The length of each fractured fragment was
measured in millimeters. An independent sample t
test was used to analyze the data. Results: Between
the R25 files, Reciproc Blue instruments showed signif-
icantly greater CFR than the Reciproc files in the apical
and coronal curves (P < .05). Between the R40 files,
Reciproc Blue instruments exhibited greater CFR in the
apical and coronal curves (P < .05). There was no differ-
ence in the fractured fragment lengths of the Reciproc
Blue files compared with the Reciproc files (P > .05).
Conclusions: The Reciproc Blue R25 and R40 files
showed greater CFR than the Reciproc R25 and R40 files
in an S-shaped canal. (J Endod 2017;-:1–4)
Key Words
Cyclic fatigue, Reciproc Blue, s-shaped canal
From the Departments of *Endodontics and †Pedodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Erciyes University, Kayseri, Turkey.
Address requests for reprints to Dr H€useyin Sinan Topçuoglu, Department of Endodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Erciyes University, Melikgazi, Kayseri 38039, Turkey.
E-mail address: topcuogluhs@hotmail.com
0099-2399/$ - see front matter
Copyright ª 2017 American Association of Endodontists.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2017.04.009
JOE — Volume -, Number -, - 2017
(NiTi)systemshavegained
popularity in endodontics.
Significance
The current study determined that Reciproc Blue
files exhibited greater cyclic fatigue resistance
It is claimed that in most
than Reciproc files in an S-shaped canal.
cases Reciproc (VDW, Mu-
nich, Germany), a single-
file system, requires only 1 file to prepare a root canal (1). The system files are
made from a special NiTi alloy called M-Wire that is created using an innovative thermal
treatment process (2). The benefits of M-Wire alloy files are increased flexibility and
improved resistance to cyclic fatigue (3). Reciproc Blue (VDW), the new generation
of single-file Reciproc instruments, has recently been introduced. The manufacturers
of this new file claim that it is much more flexible and has an even lower fracture
risk than the Reciproc file. Thanks to a special temperature protocol, the Reciproc
Blue file can also be prebent to better access curved canals (4).
Instrument fracture is a serious problem and can jeopardize the outcome of root
canal therapy. The fracture of rotary files has been attributed to torsional failure and
cyclic fatigue (5). Cyclic fatigue is caused by compression and tensile stresses on a
rotating file in a curved canal. The repeated application of these specific stresses can
weaken and fracture an instrument, usually at the maximum point of flexure (6, 7).
Previous studies have determined that cyclic fatigue is the primary cause of file
separation (8–10).
There are limited studies comparing the cyclic fatigue resistance (CFR) of recip-
rocating instruments in an S-shaped canal (11–13). The purpose of this study was to
compare the CFR of Reciproc (R25 and R40) files with Reciproc Blue (R25 and R40)
files in an S-shaped canal. The null hypothesis was that there was no significant
difference in the CFR between Reciproc and Reciproc Blue files.
Materials and Methods
Based on data from a previous study (14), power calculations indicated that the
sample size for each file type/size combination must be a minimum of 20 files. The cur-
rent study tested 20 of each file type/size combination (Reciproc R25 and R40 and
Reciproc Blue R25 and R40). Before testing, each file was examined for defects and
deformities using an operating microscope (Zeiss Opmi; Carl Zeiss, Jena, Germany)
at 24 magnification. All files were subjected to CFR testing using a stainless steel block
containing an artificial S-shaped canal specifically developed for the purpose and which
had been used in previous studies (11, 15). The artificial S-shaped canal
(diameter = 1.4 mm and length = 18 mm) had 2 curves: the first was a coronal
curve with a 60 angle of curvature and a radius of 5 mm located 8 mm from the tip
of the instrument, and the second was an apical curve with a 70 angle of curvature
and a radius of 2 mm with a center 2 mm from the tip.
Cyclic Fatigue Resistance of Reciproc Files 1
Basic Research—Technology
TABLE 1. Mean Values of Time to Fracture (TtF) and Fragment Lengths of Each File in Seconds
Apical curvature Coronal curvature
TtF FL (mm) TtF FL (mm)
Group Mean (seconds) SD Mean SD Mean (seconds) SD Mean SD
Reciproc R25 201.3 24.1 2.24 0.62 229.4 28.4 5.38 1.66
Reciproc Blue R25 353.5 47.2 2.17 0.75 378.3 35.6 5.53 1.38
Reciproc R40 268.4 36.6 2.18 0.52 302.4 44.6 5.41 1.57
Reciproc Blue R40 383.3 38.2 2.31 0.69 415.6 38.4 5.47 1.48
FL, fracture length; SD, standard deviation.

The electric handpiece was mounted on a device to allow for pre-
cise and reproducible placement of each instrument inside the artificial
canal. Reciproc and Reciproc Blue files were activated using a 6:1
reduction handpiece powered by a torque-controlled motor (Silver,
VDW) using their respective proprietary movements (Reciproc All
mode). The S-shaped canal was filled with oil (SuperOil; Singer, Eliza-
bethport, NJ) as a lubricant to reduce friction and minimize the release
of heat. The experimental procedures were performed by a single oper-
ator to avoid interoperator variability. The test procedure was timed,
and the clock was stopped as soon as a fracture was visually detected.
For each instrument, the time to fracture (TtF) in seconds from the start
of the test until the moment of breakage was recorded and registered to
the nearest whole number with a chronometer to an accuracy of 0.1. If
the fracture first occurred in the apical curvature, TtF was also recorded
and registered for the coronal fragment. The length of each instrument
fragment was measured using a digital caliper with an accuracy to
0.01 mm (Absolute Digimatic; Mitutoyo Corp, Kawasaki, Japan). The
fractured surfaces of the fractured instruments were analyzed using a

Figure 1. Scanning electron micrographs of files. A and B show fracture surfaces for the Reciproc and Reciproc Blue files, respectively (magnification 300).
C and D show the fractured surfaces of the Reciproc and Reciproc Blue files, respectively (magnification 1500).

2 Topçuoglu and Topçuoglu JOE — Volume -, Number -, - 2017


scanning electron microscope (Leo-440; LEO Electron Microscopy Ltd,
Cambridge, UK) to determine the type of fracture.
Statistical Analysis
The data were analyzed with an independent sample t test using
SPSS 20.0 software (SPSS Inc, Chicago, IL). The level of significance
was set at P = .05.
Results
Table 1 shows the mean TtF and length of the fractured fragments
of the Reciproc and Reciproc Blue instruments. All instruments first
fractured in the apical curve and then in the coronal curve. Statistical
tests showed that Reciproc Blue R25 and R40 instruments had signifi-
cantly higher CFR than Reciproc R25 and R40 instruments in both the
apical and coronal curves (P < .05). Among the Reciproc Blue and Re-
ciproc instruments, there was no statistical difference in file fragment
length, whether the fracture occurred in the apical or coronal curve
(P > .05). The scanning electron microscopic analysis revealed that
all files displayed ductile morphologic characteristics on fracture
surfaces (Fig. 1A–D). No evidence of plastic deformation in the helical
shafts of the fractured instruments was observed.
Discussion
It has been stated that radiographic investigations evaluating the
frequency and degree of canal curvatures have shown that all teeth
have secondary curvatures. However, S-shaped canals are not always
detectable in radiographs under clinical conditions (16). Iatrogenic
endodontic mishaps (ie, transportation and ledge creation) during
canal preparation in S-shaped canals can be frequent.
S-shaped canals present a much more stressful and challenging
anatomy than single-curved canals. It has been shown that S-shaped ca-
nals influence the CFR of NiTi files, with the number of cycles to fracture
being statistically lower in double-curved canals when compared with
single-curved canals (12). There is limited information on the CFR of
reciprocating files used in S-shaped canals (13, 15). Moreover, the
CFR of Reciproc and Reciproc Blue files when used in S-shaped
canals had not been previously compared. The current study
evaluated the CFR of Reciproc and Reciproc Blue instruments in an
S-shaped canal. The findings show that the Reciproc Blue files had
greater CFR than the Reciproc files in an S-shaped canal. Therefore,
the null hypothesis was rejected.
Gao et al (17) evaluated the CFR of different file designs, including
conventional superelastic NiTi, M-Wire NiTi, and Vortex Blue NiTi
(Dentsply Tulsa Dental, Tulsa, OK) and determined that Vortex Blue
NiTi showed improved fatigue resistance when compared with files
made of conventional superelastic wire and M-Wire alloy. Plotino
et al (18) evaluated the CFR difference of Vortex Blue compared with
ProFile Vortex NiTi rotary files (Dentsply Tulsa Dental) and determined
that the NiTi Blue alloy showed enhanced mechanical properties
compared with M-Wire NiTi. These findings are compatible with the
results of the current study; Reciproc Blue files (Blue technology)
had greater CFR than Reciproc files (M-Wire alloy).
NiTi instruments with controlled or reduced shape memory allow
one to easily prebend the instruments to achieve a greater taper, which
represents a similar feature found in the Reciproc Blue files. This allows
the preparation of curved root canals with a reduced risk of iatrogenic
errors, such as intracanal breakage and transportation (18). All file
types tested in the current study have the same cross-sectional design.
Therefore, the greater CFR achieved with the Reciproc Blue compared
with the Reciproc files can be associated with the reduced shape
memory of Reciproc Blue.
JOE — Volume -, Number -, - 2017
Basic Research—Technology
All files in the present study first fractured in the apical curve. The
explanation for this may be that the apical curvature (a radius of 2 mm)
was more abrupt than the coronal curvature (a radius of 5 mm), which
is compatible with studies comparing the CFR of root canal instruments
in S-shaped canals (11, 13). The current study showed no significant
difference in the mean length of fractured fragments of the
instruments tested. Fracture of the instruments occurred at or just
below the center of the curve, which confirms the precise trajectory
positioning of the files.
Natural teeth are the best specimens in which to evaluate the CFR of
NiTi files, but they are very difficult to standardize because of differences
in canal length, degree and radius of curvature, and dentin hardness
(19). Artificial canals have been widely used in laboratory studies to eval-
uate the CFR of NiTi files to ensure the standardization of experimental
conditions (20–22). However, the results of studies that use artificial
canals must be extrapolated to clinical conditions with care because of
the differences between a stainless steel block and dentin (23).
Conclusions
Under the limitations of the current study, the Reciproc Blue R25
and R40 files exhibited greater CFR than the Reciproc R25 and R40 files
in an artificial S-shaped canal. Further studies should be conducted in
canals with different angles of curvature.
Acknowledgments
The authors deny any conflicts of interest related to this study.
References
1. B€urklein S, Sch€afer E. Apically extruded debris with reciprocating single-file and
full-sequence rotary instrumentation systems. J Endod 2012;38:850–2.
2. Al-Hadlaq SM, Aljarbou FA, AlThumairy R. Evaluation of cyclic flexural fatigue of
Mwire nickel-titanium rotary instruments. J Endod 2010;36:305–7.
3. Alapati SB, Brantley WA, Iijima M, et al. Metallurgical characterization of a new
nickel-titanium wire for rotary endodontic instruments. J Endod 2009;35:1589–93.
4. VDW. Reciproc Blue. Available at: http://www.vdw-dental.com/en/presse/produkt
meldungen/reciproc-blue.html. Accessed January 20, 2017.
5. Higuera O, Plotino G, Tocci L, et al. Cyclic fatigue resistance of 3 different nickel-
titanium reciprocating instruments in artificial canals. J Endod 2015;41:913–5.
6. Pedulla E, Lo Savio F, Boninelli S, et al. Influence of cyclic torsional preloading on
cyclic fatigue resistance of nickel–titanium instruments. Int Endod J 2015;48:
1043–50.
7. Plotino G, Grande NM, Cordaro M, et al. A review of cyclic fatigue testing of nickel-
titanium rotary instruments. J Endod 2009;35:1469–76.
8. Shen Y, Zhou H, Campbell L, et al. Fatigue and nanomechanical properties of K3XF
nickel-titanium instruments. Int Endod J 2014;47:1160–7.
9. Ahn SY, Kim HC, Kim E. Kinematic effects of nickel-titanium instruments with recip-
rocating or continuous rotation motion: a systematic review of in vitro studies.
J Endod 2016;42:1009–17.
10. Inan U, Aydin C. Comparison of cyclic fatigue resistance of three different rotary
nickel-titanium instruments designed for retreatment. J Endod 2012;38:108–11.
11. Al-Sudani D, Grande NM, Plotino G, et al. Cyclic fatigue of nickel-titanium rotary in-
struments in a double (S-shaped) simulated curvature. J Endod 2012;38:987–9.
12. Duke F, Shen Y, Zhou H, et al. Cyclic fatigue of ProFile Vortex and Vortex Blue
nickel-titanium files in single and double curvatures. J Endod 2015;41:1686–90.
13. Topçuoglu HS, Topçuoglu G, Akti A, D€uzg€un S. In vitro comparison of cyclic fatigue
resistance of ProTaper Next, HyFlex CM, OneShape, and ProTaper Universal instru-
ments in a canal with a double curvature. J Endod 2016;42:969–71.
14. Kim HC, Kwak SW, Cheung GS, et al. Cyclic fatigue and torsional resistance of two
new nickel-titanium instruments used in reciprocation motion: Reciproc versus
WaveOne. J Endod 2012;38:541–4.
15. Neelakantan P, Reddy P, Gutmann JL. Cyclic fatigue of two different single files with vary-
ing kinematics in a simulated double-curved canal. J Investig Clin Dent 2016;7:272–7.
16. Willershausen B, Kasaj A, R€ohrig B, Marroquin BB. Radiographic investigation of
frequency and location of root canal curvatures in human mandibular anterior in-
cisors in vitro. J Endod 2008;34:152–6.
17. Gao Y, Gutmann JL, Wilkinson K, et al. Evaluation of the impact of raw materials on
the fatigue and mechanical properties of ProFile Vortex rotary instruments. J Endod
2012;38:398–401.
Cyclic Fatigue Resistance of Reciproc Files 3
Basic Research—Technology
18. Plotino G, Grande NM, Cotti E, et al. Blue treatment enhances cyclic fatigue resis-
tance of vortex nickel-titanium rotary files. J Endod 2014;40:1451–3.
19. Ajuz NC, Armada L, Gonçalves LS, et al. Glide path preparation in S-shaped canals
with rotary pathfinding nickel-titanium instruments. J Endod 2013;39:534–7.
20. Pedulla E, Lo Savio F, Boninelli S, et al. Torsional and cyclic fatigue resistance of a
new nickel-titanium instrument manufactured by electrical discharge machining.
J Endod 2016;42:156–9.
4 Topçuoglu and Topçuoglu
21. Hieawy A, Haapasalo M, Zhou H, et al. Phase transformation behavior and resistance
to bending and cyclic fatigue of ProTaper Gold and ProTaper Universal instruments.
J Endod 2015;41:1134–8.
22. Kiefner P, Ban M, De-Deus G. Is the reciprocating movement per se able to improve
the cyclic fatigue resistance of instruments? Int Endod J 2014;47:430–6.
23. Burroughs JR, Bergeron BE, Roberts MD, et al. Shaping ability of three nickel tita-
nium file systems in simulated S-shaped root canals. J Endod 2012;38:1618–21.
JOE — Volume -, Number -, - 2017