Mechanical Properties and Torque/Force Generation of XP-Endo Shaper, Trunatomy, Spring Endo File, and Spring Endo Heated Finish File, Part 1
Hani Ghabbani
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments for author File: 
Comments.pdf
Author Response
Comment 1
Please rephrase lines 1-9 of paragraph 2, page 12. It is not very clear presented how or if the samples
Response 1
Thank you for your valuable comments. The 2nd paragraph of the discussion section (page 12) was rephrased as follows.
The XP-endo Shaper presented the highest cyclic fatigue resistance, followed by TruNatomy Prime (Table 2, Figure 1). In this study, the cyclic fatigue resistance test of NiTi files were performed at 22°C. According to DSC curves, the XP-endo Shaper and TruNatomy Prime files consisted of austenite, martensite, and R-phase at 22 °C (Fig. 5A,B), whereas Spring Endo consisted of austenite and Spring H was composed of martensite at 22 °C (Figure 5C,D). The R-phase is a transitional phase between martensite and austenite [7]. The EM of R-phase is lower than those of martensite or austenite phases, and the transformation strain of the R-phase is less than 10% of martensitic transformation [20].
Comment 2
microstructure influences the mechanical properties.
Page 13, paragraph 4, phrase 3 (“However, in this study, there was no significant difference in the
UTS of TruNatomy Prime with a parallelogram cross-section and XP-endo Shaper with a triangular
cross-section”), please provide a possible explanation for the difference between this study and
previous ones.
Response 2
Thank you for your valuable comments. This paragraph was rephrased as follows.
According to the FE-SEM results, only TruNatomy Prime had a parallelogram cross-section, whereas the other instruments had a triangular cross-section (Figure 4). In this study, there was no significant difference in the UTS of TruNatomy Prime with a parallelogram cross-section and XP-endo Shaper with a triangular cross-section. There has been no study to compare torsional fracture resistances of TruNatomy Prime and XP-endo Shaper. XP-endo Shaper demonstrated lower torsional resistance compared to TRUShape #30/06, ProFile Vortex #30/04, and FlexMaster #30/04 with modified triangular cross-sectional designs [30,31], which were conducted at 37 °C. Conversely, torsional resistance test was performed at 22 °C in this study. Experimental temperature and alloy characteristics seem to collectively affect the torsional resistance.
Comment 3
I recommend renaming this study as “Part 1”, continue with experiments at body temperature (see
page 14, paragraph 1) and publish the obtained results as “Part 2” of this article.
Response 3
Thank you for your valuable comments. We would like to rename this study as “Mechanical Properties and Torque/Force Generation of XP-Endo Shaper, Trunatomy, Spring Endo File, and Spring Endo Heated Finish File, Part 1.”
Reviewer 2 Report
I have reviewed the manuscript “Mechanical Properties and Torque/Force Generation of XP-Endo Shaper, Trunatomy, Spring Endo File, and Spring Endo Heated Finish File” submitted to “Applied Sciences” for publication. In this study, the authors have conducted the mechanical properties and torque/force generated during canal shaping by four NiTi files with innovative designs. This manuscript fits well within the scope of the journal; it needs some improvements; there are a few suggestions that authors may consider improving it further:
The use of the English language is reasonable, however, there are a number of punctuation and grammatical errors; that should be corrected and rephrased using academic English for a better flow of text for the reader. For example. Avoid frequent use of words like “they” in the academic writing.
- Abstract is appropriate, however, the findings are not clear, some of the results can be summarized in the abstract.
The authors should define all the abbreviations at their first appearance in the text and should be used in the text.
Please add, line numbers to the manuscript/format.
The introduction; is detailed, and compact, covering the background information and the rationale of the study effectively.
Please cite a reference for ISO 3630-1:2019, in addition, please cite if any previous study was followed for mechanical testing.
Similarly, please cite Pruett’s method source, where from this information was taken?
Details of statistical analysis are missing and should be added to the methods section.
Figure 1: the measurement units should be added to the Y-axes in each chart.
Figure 3 and 4: scale bars are barely visible, please use bold scale bars.
The discussion is well written and covers the results and limitations.
Author Response
Comment 1
The use of the English language is reasonable, however, there are a number of punctuation and grammatical errors; that should be corrected and rephrased using academic English for a better flow of text for the reader. For example. Avoid frequent use of words like “they” in the academic writing.
Response 1
Thank you for your valuable comments. We have processed academic English editing of the manuscript.
Comment 2
- Abstract is appropriate, however, the findings are not clear, some of the results can be summarized in the abstract.
Response 2
Thank you for your valuable comments. We added the following sentences in the abstract.
The elastic modulus increased in the order of XP-endo Shaper, TruNatomy Prime, Spring H and Spring Endo.
TruNatomy Prime generated the least clockwise torque and screw-in force.
Comment 3
The authors should define all the abbreviations at their first appearance in the text and should be used in the text.
Response 3
Thank you for your valuable comments. We have revised the manuscript to define all the abbreviations at their first appearance in the text.
Comment 4
Please add, line numbers to the manuscript/format.
Response 4
I’m sorry for the inconvenience. We have added line numbers in the revised manuscript.
Comment 5
The introduction; is detailed, and compact, covering the background information and the rationale of the study effectively.
Response 5
Thank you for your valuable comments.
Comment 6
Please cite a reference for ISO 3630-1:2019, in addition, please cite if any previous study was followed for mechanical testing.
Response 6
Thank you for your valuable comments. We have added the reference of ISO 3630-1:2019 and a previous study that followed the guideline.
Comment 7
Similarly, please cite Pruett’s method source, where from this information was taken?
Response 7
Thank you for your valuable comments. We have added the following reference.
- Pruett, J.P.; Clement, D.J.; Carnes, D.L. Jr. Cyclic fatigue testing of nickel-titanium endodontic instruments. J. Endod. 1997; 23: 77-85. http://doi.org/
Comment 8
Details of statistical analysis are missing and should be added to the methods section.
Response 8
Thank you for your valuable comments. We have revised the manuscript as follows.
The data of the mechanical test results (bending and buckling resistances, NCF, UTS, ARF, and EM) were normally distributed according to the Shapiro–Wilk test, while the homogeneity of the variances was not satisfied by the Levene’s test. One-way ANOVA was performed to compare the mechanical test results between different file types; intergroup comparison was performed with the Games-Howell test. Pearson’s correlation analysis was conducted among the six variables of the mechanical test results, i.e., bending and buckling resistances, NCF, UTS, ARF, and EM. Statistical analysis was performed using SPSS 25 (IBM, Armonk, NY, USA) at a 95% significance level.
Comment 9
Figure 1: the measurement units should be added to the Y-axes in each chart.
Response 9
Thank you for your valuable comments. The measurement units were added in the Y-axis in each chart of Figure 1 in the revised manuscript.
Comment 10
Figure 3 and 4: scale bars are barely visible, please use bold scale bars.
Response 10
Thank you for your valuable comments. The scanning electron microscopic images and scale bars of Figures 3 and 4 are not in editable formats. We have inserted the magnification of each image in the Figure legends as follows.
Figure 3. Scanning electron microscopic photographs of TruNatomy Prime (A1-4), XP-endo Shaper (B1-4), Spring Endo (C1-4), and Spring H (D1-4) files after the cyclic fatigue resistance test.
(A1, B1, C1, D1) (×180) fractured surface; (A2, B2, C2, D2) (×1,000) magnified view of sections indicated by arrows in A1, B1, C1, and D1, respectively; (A3, B3, C3, D3) (×200) lateral surface; (A4, B4, C4, D4) (×1,000) magnified view of sections indicated by arrows in A3, B3, C3, and D3 , respectively. The asterisk indicates fatigue striation.
Figure 4. Scanning electron microscopic photographs of TruNatomy Prime (A1-4), XP-endo Shaper (B1-4), Spring Endo (C1-4), and Spring H (D1-4) files after the torsional resistance test.
(A1, B1, C1, D1) (×250) fractured surface; (A2, B2, C2, D2) (×1,000) magnified view of sections indicated by arrows in A1, B1, C1, and D1, respectively; (A3, B3, C3, D3) (×250) lateral surface; (A4, B4, C4, D4) (×1,000) magnified view of sections indicated by arrows in A3, B3, C3, and D3, respectively.
Comment 11
The discussion is well written and covers the results and limitations.
Response 11
Thank you for your valuable comments. We appreciate you again for reviewing our manuscript.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 2 Report
Ok to accept
