Effectiveness of rotatory and reciprocating movements in root canal filling material removal

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to compare the efficacy of reciprocating and rotary techniques for removing gutta-percha and sealer from root canals. Forty straight and oval single-rooted premolars were prepared up to size 30, filled with gutta-percha and sealer, and then randomly allocated to two experimental retreatment groups: ProTaper Retreatment System (PTRS) and WaveOne System (WS). Procedural errors, time of retreatment and apically extruded material were recorded for all the roots. The roots were radiographed after retreatment. The percentage of residual material was calculated using image analysis software. The data were analyzed by Kolmogorov-Smirnov and t tests, with a significance level set at 5%. No system completely removed the root filling material from the root canal. No significant differences were observed between the systems, in terms of residual filling material in any tested third (p > 0.05). WS was faster in removing filling material than PTRS (p < 0.05). Extrusion was observed in 4 cases in PTRS and in 5 cases in WS. No procedural errors were observed in either group. It can be concluded that although no differences were observed in the efficacy of PTRS and WS for removing root filling material, WS was faster than PTRS.

Efficacy of Twisted File Adaptive, Reciproc and ProTaper Universal Retreatment instruments for root-canal-filling removal: A cone-beam computed tomography study

“…These findings corroborate the results of a recent report comparing the efficacy of a reciprocating system (WaveOne, Dentsply-Maillefer, Ballaigues, Switzerland) and ProTaper UR in retreatment, showing similarity between these two systems 26) . Our results are in consistent with the study of Rios et al 15) who reported that the Reciproc system is as effective as ProTaper UR for the removal of root canal filling.…”

Filling Material Removal with Reciprocating and Rotary Systems Associated with Passive Ultrasonic Irrigation

“…NiTi instruments powered by electric motors are more efficient than manual instruments to perform filling material removal within the root canal (11,12). The use of such instruments for root canal retreatment have seen significant increase in the last few years; therefore, the authors of this study decided to compare the PTR system, which was developed exactly for this purpose, and the RS, a system that has an innovative motion kinematics and has been developed for root canal preparation (5)(6)(7)(8). Several studies have evaluated the effectiveness of reciprocating systems to perform gutta-percha and root canal sealer removal; however, the benefits of their association with PUI must be evaluated (6, 7).…”

Micro-computed tomographic evaluation of removal and extrusion of root filling material during canal retreatment

“…The complete removal of filling material from apical thirds is clinically relevant as endodontic treatment failures are usually related to bacterial remnants at the apical portion of root canals (CROZETA et al, 2016). The presence of remaining filling material in this region must be avoided when performing retreatments since the success of the endodontic intervention will depend on appropriate cleaning of this area will be impossible (SILVA et al, 2015).…”

“…Different techniques have been used to remove filling material in endodontic retreatments, including the use of manual files BLUHM, 2004), heated instruments (ZMENER, PAMEIJER;BANEGAS, 2006), ultrasonic devices (PIRANI et al, 2009), rotary files (IMURA et al, 2000;HAMMAD, QUALTROUGH, SILIKAS, 2008;RÖDIG et al, 2012), reciprocating files (SILVA et al, 2015;CROZETA et al, 2016), adaptive motion systems (CROZETA et al, 2016), and specific systems developed for retreatment (GU et al, 2008;TAKAHASHI et al, 2009). Several studies used distinct methods such as bidimensional radiographic analysis or destructive approaches sectioning specimens to evaluate the remaining filling after endodontic retreatment (BARRIESHI-NUSAR, 2002;CUNHA et al, 2007;BARLETTA et al, 2008).…”