BACKGROUND The primary goal of endodontic retreatment is to take out the root filling completely to ensure that the canal is completely cleaned. Gutta percha removal using hand instruments is a time-consuming procedure and tedious for the operator. Therefore, various nickel titanium instruments have been introduced for the effective retrieval of gutta percha. This study was done to compare the efficacy of three different rotary systems compared with manual instrumentation for gutta percha removal during retreatment. METHODS Forty-eight single rooted premolars were prepared and obturated using gutta percha and AH Plus sealer using lateral compaction technique. Samples were randomly divided into four groups of 12 specimens each. Group 1 was retreated with Hedstrom Files (H-Files), group 2 was retreated with pro taper universal retreatment files (PTUR), group 3 with R-Endo retreatment files and group 4 with Neoendo retreatment files. Time taken for the retreatment was recorded for each tooth using a stopwatch. The samples were sectioned longitudinally and observed under a stereomicroscope. Digital images were taken and analysed using digital image analysing software. The data was statistically analysed using Kruskal-Wallis and Post-hoc Mann-Whitney test. RESULTS The Neoendo group showed significantly lower amount of residual material compared to PTUR, R-Endo and the H-Files (P = 0.00). The maximum residual material was observed in the H file group. The time taken for gutta percha removal was least for the Neoendo group followed by PTUR, R-Endo and H-Files. CONCLUSIONS None of the instruments were able to remove the filling material completely. Gutta percha removal using Neoendo and protaper universal retreatment files were faster and more efficient compared to REndo and H files. KEY WORDS Endodontic Retreatment, Protaper Universal Retreatment Files, R-Endo, Neoendo, HFiles