evidencegaps
Primary study · included by 1 review

Mechanical and Metallurgical Evaluation of 3 Different Nickel-Titanium Rotary Instruments: An In Vitro and In Laboratory Study.

Zanza 2022 (ref 38) · Zanza Alessio, Russo Paola, Reda Rodolfo, et al. · Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022

Included by

Comparison of the cyclic fatigue resistance of original and replica-like files: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Non-Cochrane · intervention · 2026 · cited as Zanza 2022 · Table 2; Study characteristics; reference list
Outcome this study informsPooled effectEvidenceCertainty
Time to fracture (TTF), cyclic fatigue resistance
Replica-like Ni-Ti endodontic files vs Original-brand Ni-Ti endodontic files
SMD -1.197 [-1.830, -0.564]NRGRADE not reported
Number of cycles to fracture (NCF), cyclic fatigue resistance
Replica-like Ni-Ti endodontic files vs Original-brand Ni-Ti endodontic files
SMD -1.532 [-3.615, 0.550]5 studiesGRADE not reported
Time to fracture (TTF), cyclic fatigue resistance
Replica-like Ni-Ti endodontic files vs Original-brand Ni-Ti endodontic files
SMD -0.579 [-3.021, 1.862]NRGRADE not reported
Number of cycles to fracture (NCF), cyclic fatigue resistance
Replica-like Ni-Ti endodontic files vs Original-brand Ni-Ti endodontic files
SMD -1.719 [-4.270, 0.833]NRGRADE not reported
Time to fracture (TTF), cyclic fatigue resistance
Replica-like Ni-Ti endodontic files vs Original-brand Ni-Ti endodontic files
SMD -0.845 [-1.268, -0.423]13 studiesGRADE not reported
Number of cycles to fracture (NCF), cyclic fatigue resistance
Replica-like Ni-Ti endodontic files vs Original-brand Ni-Ti endodontic files
SMD -1.395 [-4.075, 1.286]NRGRADE not reported

1 including review in total.