Journal of IMAB - Annual Proceeding (Scientific Papers)
Publisher: Peytchinski, Gospodin Iliev
ISSN: 1312 773X (Online)
Issue: 2014, vol. 20, issue 5
Subject Collection: Oral and Dental Medicine
Pages: 621-625
DOI: 10.5272/jimab.2014205.621
Published online: 27 October 2014

J of IMAB 2014 Oct-Dec;20(5):621-625
Kalin K. ShiyakovCorresponding Autor, Radosveta I. Vasileva
Department of Conservative Dentistry, Faculty of Dental Medicine, Medical University – Sofia, Bulgaria.

The aim of the study was to determine the compatibility of 6 piezoelectric scalers - Mini Piezon (EMS), Pyon 2 LED (W&H), Woodpecker HW-3H (GWMI), Varios 550 (NSK), P5 Newtron (Satelec-Acteon) and DTE HD-7H (GWMI) with 8 types of endosonic tips for separated instruments removal - K-files # 20 and 25  (EMS), ET25 (Satelec), Redo 2 (VDW), CPR-tips 6,7,8 (Obtura Spartan),  Proultra Endo tips 6,7,8 (Dentsply-Maillefer),  RT3 (EMS), Endo E3 (W&H), E7 (NSK).
Methods: Examined and measured was the change in the tips’ displacement amplitude with the power increase of the scalers under total magnification 80x with an optical microscope (Leica MZ6) and an image-measuring software (Klonk Image Measurement).
Results: Ultrasonic devices’ compatibility with the examined tips was as follows: Woodpecker – 76,9%, Mini Piezon – 61,5%, Pyon 2 LED - 30,7%, Varios 550 – 83,3%, P5 Newtron – 83,3%, DTE – 33,3%. Lack of compatibility was found in 40,35%  of all cases. In 29,82% of the cases of lack of compatibility it was demonstrated as a non-effective vibration, and in the rest of the cases – 10,53% - uncontrolled over-powerful vibration, which was dangerous to use.
Conclusion: Endosonic tips should be carefully chosen in accordance with the ultrasonic scaler used.

Key words: endodontic ultrasonic tips, separated instruments removal, piezoelectric ultrasonic scalers,

- Download FULL TEXT /PDF 1114 KB/
Please cite this article in PubMed Style or AMA (American Medical Association) Style:
Shiyakov KK, Vasileva RI. Resonance compatibility between endosonic tips and ultrasonic devices of different brands. J of IMAB. 2014 Oct-Dec;20(5):621-625.

Correspondence to: Dr. Kalin Shiyakov, Department of Conservative Dentistry, Faculty of Dental Medicine, Medical University – Sofia; 1, Sv. Georgi Sofiyski Blvd, 1431 Sofia, Bulgaria; E-mail:

1. EMS – Electro Medical Systems – Online Catalogue 2013, Piezon Method, Swiss Instruments Endo Plus System. Available from: [12.01.2014] 
2. NSK Dental – Tip Book, Ultrasonic Non-surgical Endodontics, p.22-23. Available from: [12.01.2014] 
3. Obtura Spartan Endodontics – Online Catalogue 2013, Retreatment – CPR-tips. Available from: [12.01.2014]
4. Satelec Acteon Tip Book, Non-surgical Endodontics, Endo success retreatment, p. 36-48. Available from:
5. Pyon 2 led > instructions for use > 20. Technical data > p.44 > working frequency. Available from: 
6. D'Arcangelo C, Varvara G, De Fazio P. Broken instrument removal – two cases. J Endod. 2000 Jun;26(6):368-370. [PubMed] [CrossRef]. 
7. Gencoglu N, Helvacioglu D. Comparison of the different techniques to remove fractured endodontic instruments from root canal systems. Eur J Dent. 2009 Apr;3(2):90-5. [PubMed]
8. Ruddle CJ. Nonsurgical retreatment. J Endod. 2004 Dec;30(12):827-845. [PubMed] [CrossRef]
9. Ruddle CJ. Broken instrument removal. The endodontic challenge. Dent Today. 2002 Jul;21(7):70-72, 74, 76 pasim. [PubMed]. 
10. Souter NG, Messer HH. Complications associated with fractured file removal using an ultrasonic technique. J Endod. 2005 Jun;31(6):450-452. [PubMed
11. Suter B, Lussi A, Sequeira P. Probability of removing fractured instruments from root canals. Int Endod J. 2005 Feb;38(2):112-123. [PubMed] [CrossRef]
12. Ward JR, Parashos P, Messer HH. Evaluation of an ultrasonic technique to remove fractured rotary nickel-titanium endodontic instruments from root canals: an experimental study. J Endod. 2003 Nov;29(11):756-63. [PubMed] [CrossRef]
13. Maruyama Y, Takasaki M, Mizuno T. Resonance Frequency Tracing System for Langevin Type Ultrasonic Transducers. Chapter 7 in “Mechatronic Systems Simulation Modeling and Control”. Edited by Annalisa Milella Donato Di Paola and Grazia Cicirelli. ISBN: 978-953-307-041-4, InTech. 2010 Mar 1; p. 105-116. [CrossRef]
14. Lea SC, Landini G, Walmsley AD. Assessing the vibrations of dental ultrasonic scalers. J Sound Vibrat. 2004 Apr;271(3-5):1113-1120. [CrossRef]
15. Pereira AHA, Tirapelli C, Rodolpho LA. Ultrasonic dental scaler performance assessment with an innovative cavitometer. Am J Applied Sci. 2010, 7(3):290-300. [CrossRef]
16. Walmsley AD, Laird WR, Williams AR. Displacement amplitude as a measure of the acoustic output of ultrasonic scalers. Dent Mater. 1986 Jun;2(3):97-100. [PubMed] [CrossRef]
17. Lea SC, Landini G, Walmsley AD. Displacement amplitude of ultrasonic scaler inserts. J Clin Periodontol. 2003 Jun;30(6): 505-510. [PubMed] [CrossRef]
18. Lea SC, Landini G, Walmsley AD. Ultrasonic scaler tip performance under various load conditions. J Clin Periodontol. 2003 Oct;30(10):876-881. [PubMed] [CrossRef]
19. Lea SC, Landini G, Walmsley AD. The effect of wear on ultrasonic scaler tip displacement amplitude. J Clin Periodontol. 2006 Jan;33(1):37-41. [PubMed] [CrossRef].

Received: 25 June 2014
Published online: 27 October 2014

back to Online Journal