1. Schäfer E, Schulz-Bongert U, Tulus G. Comparison of hand stainless steel and nickel titanium rotary instrumentation: a clinical study. J Endod. 2004; 30:432–435. PMID:
15167474.
2. Peters OA. Current challenges and concepts in the preparation of root canal systems: a review. J Endod. 2004; 30:559–567. PMID:
15273636.
3. Cheung GS, Liu CS. A retrospective study of endodontic treatment outcome between nickel-titanium rotary and stainless steel hand filing techniques. J Endod. 2009; 35:938–943. PMID:
19567311.
4. Sonntag D, Guntermann A, Kim SK, Stachniss V. Root canal shaping with manual stainless steel files and rotary Ni-Ti files performed by students. Int Endod J. 2003; 36:246–255. PMID:
12702118.
5. Glossen CR, Haller RH, Dove SB, del Rio CE. A comparison of root canal preparations using Ni-Ti hand, Ni-Ti engine-driven, and K-Flex endodontic instruments. J Endod. 1995; 21:146–151. PMID:
7561658.
6. Sattapan B, Nervo GJ, Palamara JE, Messer HH. Defects in rotary nickel-titanium files after clinical use. J Endod. 2000; 26:161–165. PMID:
11199711.
7. Alapati SB, Brantley WA, Svec TA, Powers JM, Nusstein JM, Daehn GS. SEM observations of nickel-titanium rotary endodontic instruments that fractured during clinical use. J Endod. 2005; 31:40–43. PMID:
15614004.
8. Cho OI, Versluis A, Cheung GS, Ha JH, Hur B, Kim HC. Cyclic fatigue resistance tests of nickel-titanium rotary files using simulated canal and weight loading conditions. Restor Dent Endod. 2013; 38:31–35. PMID:
23493583.
9. Cheung GS. Instrument fracture: mechanisms, removal of fragments, and clinical outcomes. Endod Topics. 2007; 16:1–26.
10. Tsujimoto M, Irifune Y, Tsujimoto Y, Yamada S, Watanabe I, Hayashi Y. Comparison of conventional and new-generation nickel-titanium files in regard to their physical properties. J Endod. 2014; 40:1824–1829. PMID:
25266465.
11. Kim HC, Kim HJ, Lee CJ, Kim BM, Park JK, Versluis A. Mechanical response of nickel-titanium instruments with different cross-sectional designs during shaping of simulated curved canals. Int Endod J. 2009; 42:593–602. PMID:
19467053.
12. Kwak SW, Ha JH, Lee CJ, El Abed R, Abu-Tahun IH, Kim HC. Effects of pitch length and heat treatment on the mechanical properties of the glide path preparation instruments. J Endod. 2016; 42:788–792. PMID:
26972489.
13. Shen Y, Zhou HM, Zheng YF, Peng B, Haapasalo M. Current challenges and concepts of the thermomechanical treatment of nickel-titanium instruments. J Endod. 2013; 39:163–172. PMID:
23321225.
14. Kuhn G, Tavernier B, Jordan L. Influence of structure on nickel-titanium endodontic instruments failure. J Endod. 2001; 27:516–520. PMID:
11501589.
15. Yum J, Cheung GS, Park JK, Hur B, Kim HC. Torsional strength and toughness of nickel-titanium rotary files. J Endod. 2011; 37:382–386. PMID:
21329826.
16. Schneider SW. A comparison of canal preparations in straight and curved root canals. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol. 1971; 32:271–275. PMID:
5284110.
17. Pruett JP, Clement DJ, Carnes DL Jr. Cyclic fatigue testing of nickel-titanium endodontic instruments. J Endod. 1997; 23:77–85. PMID:
9220735.
18. Panitvisai P, Parunnit P, Sathorn C, Messer HH. Impact of a retained instrument on treatment outcome: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Endod. 2010; 36:775–780. PMID:
20416418.
19. McGuigan MB, Louca C, Duncan HF. The impact of fractured endodontic instruments on treatment outcome. Br Dent J. 2013; 214:285–289. PMID:
23518972.
20. Xu X, Eng M, Zheng Y, Eng D. Comparative study of torsional and bending properties for six models of nickel-titanium root canal instruments with different cross-sections. J Endod. 2006; 32:372–375. PMID:
16554216.
21. Park SY, Cheung GS, Yum J, Hur B, Park JK, Kim HC. Dynamic torsional resistance of nickel-titanium rotary instruments. J Endod. 2010; 36:1200–1204. PMID:
20630299.
22. Wycoff RC, Berzins DW. An in vitro comparison of torsional stress properties of three different rotary nickel-titanium files with a similar cross-sectional design. J Endod. 2012; 38:1118–1120. PMID:
22794218.
23. Baek SH, Lee CJ, Versluis A, Kim BM, Lee W, Kim HC. Comparison of torsional stiffness of nickel-titanium rotary files with different geometric characteristics. J Endod. 2011; 37:1283–1286. PMID:
21846549.
24. Yao JH, Schwartz SA, Beeson TJ. Cyclic fatigue of three types of rotary nickel-titanium files in a dynamic model. J Endod. 2006; 32:55–57. PMID:
16410070.
25. Li UM, Lee BS, Shih CT, Lan WH, Lin CP. Cyclic fatigue of endodontic nickel titanium rotary instruments: static and dynamic tests. J Endod. 2002; 28:448–451. PMID:
12067126.
26. Ray JJ, Kirkpatrick TC, Rutledge RE. Cyclic fatigue of EndoSequence and K3 rotary files in a dynamic model. J Endod. 2007; 33:1469–1472. PMID:
18037061.
27. Cheung GS, Shen Y, Darvell BW. Does electropolishing improve the low-cycle fatigue behavior of a nickel-titanium rotary instrument in hypochlorite? J Endod. 2007; 33:1217–1221. PMID:
17889693.
28. Kim HC, Yum J, Hur B, Cheung GS. Cyclic fatigue and fracture characteristics of ground and twisted nickel-titanium rotary files. J Endod. 2010; 36:147–152. PMID:
20003955.
29. Kim BH, Ha JH, Lee WC, Kwak SW, Kim HC. Effect from surface treatment of nickel-titanium rotary files on the fracture resistance. Scanning. 2015; 37:82–87. PMID:
25488324.
30. Anderson ME, Price JW, Parashos P. Fracture resistance of electropolished rotary nickel-titanium endodontic instruments. J Endod. 2007; 33:1212–1216. PMID:
17889692.