A comparison of the relative efficacies of four hand and rotary instrumentation techniques during endodontic retreatment

Imura, Noboru; Kato, Augusto Shoji; Hata, Gin-ichiro; Uemura, Manabu; Toda, Tadao; Weine, Franklin S.

doi:10.1046/j.1365-2591.2000.00320.x

Cited by 142 publications

(278 citation statements)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

209

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…When analyzing the efficacy of the retreatment techniques in the root thirds independently, no significant differences were detected between both approaches tested (IMURA et al, 2000;PIRANI et al, 2009;ERSEV et al, 2012). However, significant differences on the residual volume of filling material were verified between the cervical and the middle/apical thirds and between the cervical and the apical thirds for the MN and RT groups, respectively ( Table 2).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 94%

“…Several studies on extrusion of root filling used methods in which the extruded material was freely released, without any barrier to block debris (IMURA et al, 2000;HUANG et al, 2007;SOMMA et al, 2008;MOLLO et al, 2012). This fact does not correspond to the clinical reality, because periodontal structures prevent larger amounts of debris to reach the apical region 1115 Micro-computed tomographic… AZEVEDO, K. C. M. et al (SELTZER et al, 1968).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…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).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

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

Azevedo¹,

Pereira²,

Oliveira³

et al. 2016

Biosci. J.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ABSTRACT:This study aimed to assess the efficiency of manual and rotary techniques for removing root filling material in endodontic treated canals and to evaluate the extrusion of debris via apical foramen. After access preparation, thirty human lower central incisors were instrumented, filled and divided into two groups (n=15): MNmanual retreatment technique; RT-rotary retreatment technique. The teeth were submitted to micro-computed tomographic scanning before and after the retreatment procedure, for quantifying the remaining filling material by relating the initial and final conditions. The analysis was conducted separately in all root thirds. The volume of material extruded through the apical foramen was also quantified. The data were statistically analyzed using t-test and two-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) at 5% of significance. No significant differences were detected between remaining filling material for the techniques evaluated (p=0.74), even considering the apical third only (p>0.75). Significant differences were found for the remaining filling material verified between the cervical third and middle/apical thirds, with lower values being observed at the cervical third for both groups (p<0.05). Apical extrusion of filling material was verified in seven specimens (2 from MN group and 5 from RT group). Both techniques showed similar performance for removing filling material from the root canal, considering the whole tooth or the root thirds independently. The apical extrusion of filling material observed was not sufficient to indicate which technique has increased tendency to induce more events during retreatments.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 94%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

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

Azevedo¹,

Pereira²,

Oliveira³

et al. 2016

Biosci. J.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Diferentes metodologías se han reportado tales como: división longitudinal de los dientes (Friedman et al, 1993), método que puede desplazar los remanentes de gutapercha al seccionarse la raíz (Ferreira et al, 2001); asociación de corte longitudinal y transversal (Imura et al, 2000); corte y registros fotográficos (Wilcox, 1989), examen de cortes fotografiados en microscopio en asociación con examen radiográfico (Hulsmann & Stotz, 1997).…”

Section: Discussionunclassified

“…De acuerdo a los resultados obtenidos, ninguna de las técnicas evaluadas elimina todo el relleno de los canales radiculares, hallazgo que es consistente con lo reportado en la literatura (Wilcox et al, 1987;Imura et al;Hammad et al, 2008) además que la evaluación del porcentaje total de material de relleno eliminado no mostró diferencias estadísticamente significativas entre los grupos estudiados, al igual que los estudios realizados por Gergi & Sabbagh (2007), a diferencia del estudio de Gu et al (2008) que muestra diferencias significativas al comparar la desobturación entre Protaper Universal y limas manuales.…”

Section: Discussionunclassified

Eficiencia de Tres Técnicas en la Remoción de Gutapercha

Monardes

Lara

Quiroga³

et al. 2016

Int. J. Odontostomat.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

RESUMEN:Cuando la terapia endodóntica fracasa, las opciones para solucionar este problema incluyen preservar el diente a través del retratamiento ortógrado o cirugía apical. Siempre que sea posible, el retratamiento endodóntico no quirúrgico debe ser la opción elegida. Diferentes sistemas rotatorios han sido propuestos como una alternativa a la instrumentación manual para la remoción de la gutapercha.El objetivo de este trabajo fue comparar la eficacia y la eficiencia en la desobturación total del canal radicular, utilizando dos tipos de instrumentos rotatorios: limas Protaper Universal ® y limas Protaper Retratamiento ® con limas manuales tipo K. Se instrumentaron 45 canales radiculares, con limas mecanizadas del sistema Mtwo ® , hasta la 25/06 y terminados de conformar con lima K #40 e irrigados con hipoclorito de sodio al 2,5 % entre cada instrumento. Los dientes fueron obturados con técnica de condensación lateral, utilizando conos de gutapercha y cemento Tubliseal ® .La muestra se dividió al azar en tres grupos A, B y C, de 15 canales cada uno, el grupo A se desobturó con limas ™Protaper Universal. El grupo B se desobturó con limas ™Protaper retratamiento y el grupo C se desobturó totalmente con limas K. Se cronometró cada procedimiento de desobturación y al término de esta, se tomó una radiografía en sentido buco-lingual y otra en sentido mesio-distal para cuantificar la remoción de gutapercha en cada grupo. Los resultados muestran que no existe diferencia significativa en la eliminación total del relleno endodóntico entre los tres grupos (p= 0,271) pero que los tiempos empleados en la desobturación total de los canales entre los grupos, muestra diferencias significativas entre Protaper Retratamiento y limas K, y entre Protaper Universal y limas K (p <0,05). Bajo las condiciones de este estudio, ningún sistema fue capaz de remover toda la gutapercha del interior del canal radicular.PALABRAS CLAVES: retratamiento endodóntico, limas k, limas protaper universal, limas protaper retramiento. INTRODUCCIÓNCuando la terapia endodóntica fracasa, las opciones de tratamiento incluyen preservar el diente por medio del retratamiento ortógrado o la cirugía apical. Siempre que sea posible, el retratamiento endodóntico no quirúrgico debe ser la opción elegida, ya que es el método más conservador para resolver el problema (Saad Al-Hadlaq et al., 2007).El objetivo principal del retratamiento endodóntico es recuperar el acceso al foramen apical y la permeabilidad del canal a través de la completa remoción del material obturador, para facilitar la correcta limpieza, conformación y obturación tridimensional del sistema de canales radiculares (Mandel & Friedman, 1992). La remoción total de gutapercha particularmente, cuando está bien compactada o el tratamiento ha sido realizado hace mucho tiempo se transforma en un procedimiento engorroso, que demanda de varias sesiones clínicas, para mejorar esto, diferentes sistemas rotatorios han sido propuestos como una alternativa a la instrumentación manual para la remoción de la gutaper...

show abstract

Clinical microscopic analysis of protaper retreatment system efficacy considering root canal thirds using three endodontic sealers

Só

Figueiredo

Fachin

et al. 2012

Microscopy Res & Technique

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

To evaluate the efficacy of ProTaper Universal rotary retreatment system and the influence of sealer type on the presence of filling debris in the reinstrumented canals viewed in an operative clinical microscope. Forty-five palatal root canals of first molars were filled with gutta-percha and one of the following sealers: G1, EndoFill; G2, AH Plus; G3, Sealapex. The canals were then reinstrumented with ProTaper Universal rotary system. Roots were longitudinally sectioned and examined under an operative clinical microscope (10×), and the amount of filling debris on canal walls was analyzed using the AutoCAD 2004 software. A single operator used a specific software tool to outline the canal area and the filling debris area in each third (cervical, middle, and apical), as well as the total canal area. Data were analyzed by Kruskal-Wallis test and Tukey test at P < 0.05. Sealapex demonstrated significant differences in the average of filling debris area/canal among the 3 thirds. This group revealed that apical third showed more debris than the both cervical and middle third (P < 0.0001). Endofill presented significantly more filling debris than Sealapex in the cervical third (P < 0.05). In the middle (P = 0.12) and apical third (P = 0.10), there were no differences amongst groups. Debris was left in all canal thirds, regardless of the retreatment technique. The greatest differences between techniques and sealers were found in the cervical third.

show abstract

A comparison of the relative efficacies of four hand and rotary instrumentation techniques during endodontic retreatment

Abstract: The results showed that overall, all instruments may leave filling material inside the root canal. During retreatment there is a risk of instrument breakage, especially rotary instruments.

Cited by 142 publications

References 18 publications

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

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

Eficiencia de Tres Técnicas en la Remoción de Gutapercha

Clinical microscopic analysis of protaper retreatment system efficacy considering root canal thirds using three endodontic sealers

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About