Affiliation:
1. Melbourne Dental School The University of Melbourne Melbourne Australia
Abstract
AbstractBackgroundRotary nickel–titanium (NiTi) instruments are made to exacting standards and are costly to manufacture, and quality control is paramount. Consequently, unauthorized factories make counterfeit instruments that are less expensive and may therefore be attractive to dentists. Little information exists about the metallurgy and manufacturing quality of such instruments. There is the potential for counterfeit instruments to be at higher risk of fracture during treatment, thereby compromising clinical outcomes. The aim of this study was to evaluate physical and manufacturing properties of genuine and counterfeit ProTaper Next™ and Mtwo® rotary NiTi instruments.MethodsThis study investigated the metallurgical properties, manufacturing quality, microhardness and number of cycles to failure of two commonly used rotary NiTi systems and compared them with counterfeit products purporting to be genuine articles.ResultsCounterfeit instruments were found to be inferior in manufacturing standards and were less resistant to cyclic fatigue when compared to genuine instruments.ConclusionsCounterfeit rotary NiTi instruments may be less efficient at preparing root canals and may be at higher risk of fracture during endodontic treatment. Dentists must be aware that, although less expensive, counterfeit instruments may be of dubious manufacturing quality and at higher risk of fracture if used in patients. © 2023 Australian Dental Association.