Objectives:The aim of this in vitro study was to compare the efficacy of two retreatment rotary systems in the removal of Gutta-percha (GP) and sealer from the root canal walls with or without solvent.Materials and Methods:Forty-eight extracted human mandibular first premolars were prepared and obturated with GP and AH Plus sealer. Samples were then randomly divided into four groups. Group I was retreated with MtwoR rotary system without solvent, Group II was retreated with MtwoR rotary system with Endosolv R as the solvent, Group III with D-RaCe rotary system without solvent, and Group IV with D-RaCe rotary system and Endosolv R solvent. The cleanliness of canal walls was determined by stereomicroscope (×20) and AutoCAD software. Kruskal–Wallis test and Mann–Whitney U-test were used to compare the data.Results:Results showed that none of the retreatment systems used in this study was able to completely remove the root canal filling material. D-RaCe with or without solvent showed significantly (P > 0.05) less filling material at all levels compared to MtwoR with/without solvent.Conclusion:Within the limitation of the current study, D-RaCe rotary retreatment system is more effective in removing filling material from root canal walls when compared to MtwoR rotary retreatment system.
There was no statistical significance between stainless steel hand files and rotary files in terms of crack formation. Instrumentation length had a significant effect on the formation of cracks when rotary files were used. Using rotary instruments 1 mm short of apical foramen caused lesser crack formation. But, there was no statistically significant difference in number of cracks formed with hand files at two instrumentation levels.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.