Saiba mais sobre o Pacote de Segurança Dentsply Sirona Windows 11 para continuar a garantir a segurança e compatibilidade dos seus dispositivos Dentsply Sirona.
Longing for one that does it all? Designed to enable shaping without the need for an additional scouting or glidepath instrument in most cases, the Reciproc family offers you efficiency in time saving through real one file endo.1 On top of it the Reciproc family is one of the most heavily researched NiTi systems worldwide with more than 650 peer reviewed publications.2
The universal and flexible instrument for the majority of cases.
The instrument especially favorable for retreatment thanks to m-wire.
For retreatment
Stiffer file (m-wire) for retreatment
M-Wire NiTi with patented thermal treatment
R25 (0.25mm, taper .08), R40 (0.40mm, taper .06), R50 (0.50mm, taper .05)
21mm, 25mm, 31mm
S-shaped cross-section
Moderate flexibility suitable for retreatments
Single-use design reduces cross-contamination
For regular anatomies and wider root canals
Universal and flexible instrument for the majority of cases
Heat-treated NiTi with improved flexibility and resistance to fatigue
R25 (0.25mm, taper .08), R40 (0.40mm, taper .06), R50 (0.50mm, taper .05)
21mm, 25mm, 31mm
S-shaped cross-section
Blue heat treated NiTi improves centering abilities of the file to reduce canal transportation.
Prebendable for easier access
1. Zuolo, M.L., M.C. Carvalho, and G. De-Deus, Negotiability of Second Mesiobuccal Canals in Maxillary Molars Using a Reciprocating System. J Endod, 2015. 41(11): p. 1913-7. Based on treatment of MB2 canals of more than 300 patients. The aim was to assess the frequency in which Reciproc® R25 was able to directly scout and reach working lengths in comparison with hand files. In the hand file group working length was successfully reached in 57.48%. In the Reciproc® R25 group the working length was successfully reached in 85.63% of cases.
2. > 650 peer reviewed publications (number of publications on the Reciproc® family from PubMed (key words: Reciproc(title/ abstract), on June 30, 2023)
3. Based on less files in clinical sequence, easy selection of file to suite the case, no change in motor settings.
4. Less working steps for the customer, no sterilization prior and after use, no change of mechanical file in the contra-angle for most of the cases, less chairside organization
5. Kanter V, Weldon E, Nair U, et al. A quantitative and qualitative analysis of ultrasonic versus sonic endodontic systems on canal cleanliness and obturation.Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2011;112(6):809- 813.doi:10.1016/j.tripleo. 2011.06.002.