The Comparative Efficacy of Different Files in The Removal of Different Sealers in Simulated Root Canal Retreatment- An In-vitro Study

Seyam

Egyptian Dental Journal

2017

Objective: Quantitative assessment of apically extruded debris and retreatability of two sealers using two rotary retreatment systems Methodology: Two NiTi rotary file systems; ProTaper Universal (PT) retreatment files (Dentsply-Maillefer, Ballaigues, Switzerland) and Mtwo R retreatment (MT) rotary files (Sweden and Martina, Padova, Italy) and two sealers; AH Plus (Dentsply International Inc., York, PA, USA) and SmartPaste Bio (DRFP Ltd., Stamford, UK) were used in this study. The root canals of 40 single-rooted human premolar teeth having nearly similar length were prepared. The prepared root canals were obturated with gutta-percha and either AH Plus or Smart Paste Bio sealers (n=20/ group). Each group was then subdivided into two subgroups (n = 10 lsubgroup) according to whether the root filling material was removed using either Protaper Universal retreatment or MTwo Retreatment Kit. After retreatment, the apically extruded debris was collected in Eppendorf tubes which were weighed before and after retreatment with an electronic balance. The retreatability of the both sealers was assessed using CBCT imaging by calculating the volume of the residual filling material post-treatment in the middle and apical thirds of the root canals. Results were statistically analyzed using one-way-analysis-of-variance; (P<0.05). Results: Statistically, there was no significant difference in the weight of collected apically extruded debris nor in in the remaining volume of the obturating materials between all groups (P=0.849 and P=0.8831), respectively. Conclusions: All investigated retreatment techniques caused debris extrusion and left filling remnants inside the root canals. SmartPaste Bio sealer is as retreatable as AH Plus sealers.

Section: Results Of the Retreatability Of The Two Sealerssupporting

confidence: 92%

Quantitative Assessment of Apically Extruded Debris and Retreatability of Two Sealers Using Two Rotary Retreatment Systems

Seyam

Egyptian Dental Journal

2017

“…[ 13 14 ] MTwo R files contain a cutting tip with a constant helical angle, that ensures easy progression of the instruments into the gutta-percha filling, without the need to follow a crown-down instrumentation sequence. As better removal of filling material by MTwo R files was reported compared to other systems,[ 15 16 ] these files were used. The apical enlargement was done two sizes beyond the initial preparation size of the root canal.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effect of different obturating techniques and sealers on the removal of filling materials during endodontic retreatment

et al. 2019

Background: Adequate removal of previous root filling materials is an important objective during endodontic retreatment. Aim: This study was aimed to evaluate the influence of obturation quality and sealer type on the removal of root filling materials during endodontic retreatment using micro-computed tomography (μ-CT). Materials and Methods: Ninety extracted mandibular premolars were randomly assigned to two groups ( n = 45) based on the type of sealer (AH Plus and BioRoot RCS) and three sub-groups based on the obturating technique used, i.e., cold lateral condensation, warm vertical compaction, and thermoplasticized injectable techniques. Specimens were scanned using μ-CT before and after retreatment to assess the amount of filling material, and time taken for removal was recorded. Statistical Analysis: Data were analyzed using two-way analysis of variance and Tukey's multiple post hoc test at 5% significance level. Results: Filling debris percentage and retreatment time were not significantly affected by the type of sealer ( P ≥ 0.05). The percentage of remaining filling material was higher in teeth obturated with thermoplasticized technique ( P < 0.05). Significantly more filling material debris was observed in apical third ( P < 0.05). Conclusions: The type of obturating technique used for initial root canal treatment has influenced the amount of remaining filling material and retreatment time. Retreatability of the BioRoot RCS sealer was similar to the AH Plus sealer.

“…Similar results were observed when the ProTaper retreatment system was compared with other rotational (ProTaper conventional, Mtwo, ProTaper Next, D-Race, and Easy ProDesign Logic RT) and reciprocating (WaveOne) systems, and although no statistically significant difference was found among them, the ProTaper R system showed the best overall intracanal cleaning results [4,29,30,32,33,46]. On the other hand, some studies have confirmed that the ProTaper R system left a greater volume of residues inside the root canals than the conventional ProTaper systems in combination with Eucaliptol, D-Race, TF Adaptative, Mtwo, ProTaper conventional, and WaveOne Gold systems [6,8,14,16,24].…”

Section: Quantity Of Intracanal Residual Filling Materialsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Other materials used for filling the root canals are gutta-percha and AH Plus sealer, but the results related to the AH Plus sealer were not positive for easy disintegration [15,16], as this material has a resinous base, thus allowing greater adhesion to the dentin walls and making the removal more difficult [36].…”

Section: Influence Of the Filling Materialsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Removal of obturation material in endodontic retreatment: a literature review

Menezes

Carneiro

Vale

2019

RSBO

Introduction: Removal of filling material from the root canal system is required when a previous endodontic treatment fails, what may result in the permanence of an unfavorable periapical condition. The intent is to completely remove the filling material inside of the root canal to achieve sufficient cleaning and shaping for successful retreatment. Objective: The aims of this article were to provide asystematic review of the different techniques of endodontic filling material associated or not with organic solvents and to analyze them critically in terms of advantages and disadvantages of each technique. Literature review: The descriptors used were “guttapercha”, “obturation,” and “retreatment” in the following databases: PubMed, MEDLINE, Latin American and Caribbean Center on Health Sciences Information (Bireme), Latin-American and CaribbeanHealth Sciences (Lilacs), Brazilian Dentistry Bibliography (BBO), and Scientific Electronic Library Online (SciELO). Publications of in vitro/ ex vivo and in vivo experiments without language restriction between the years 2010 and 2018 were selected. Conclusion: None of the techniques were capable of performing complete root canal cleaning, and the manual method was so effective as the automated method, although it requires longer working time. Furthermore, although this review confirmed that the solvent action did not allow a significantimprovement in the removal of the filling material, ultrasoundactivated irrigation proved to be an efficient adjunctive device as it could significantly reduce the volume of intracanal residuals.