Efficacy of 2 Reciprocating Systems Compared with a Rotary Retreatment System for Gutta-percha Removal

Rios, Marcos de Azevêdo; Villela, Alexandre Mascarenhas; Cunha, Rodrigo Sanches; Velasco, Rafael Cortez; Martin, Alexandre Sigrist De; Kato, Augusto Shoji; Bueno, Carlos Eduardo da Silveira

doi:10.1016/j.joen.2013.11.013

Cited by 121 publications

(126 citation statements)

References 31 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In this study, no significant cleansing differences were found between WS and PTRS. The favorable results observed for the WaveOne system corroborated those reported previously, 22,23 in which single-file reciprocating systems showed results similar to full-sequence rotary and hand systems. The reciprocating motion, together with the marked taper of WaveOne files, creates a greater contact area between the instrument and the gutta-percha, allowing filling removal as effective as that produced by full-sequence rotary systems.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 89%

“…8,21,22,25 To date, it has not been proven that complete removal of filling materials will ensure success of root canal retreatment, or that any remaining material will cause retreatment failure. However, removing as much filling material as possible would seem essential in uncovering any remaining necrotic tissue or bacterial remnants that may be responsible for periapical inflammation and persistent disease.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…7,22,23,25,26 These studies reported the virtual impossibility of removing 100% of the residual gutta-percha and sealer from root canal walls, irrespective of the technique used for filling material removal. In this study, no significant cleansing differences were found between WS and PTRS.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Even though there is growing evidence of safety and shaping effectiveness of the reciprocating motion, 14,17,18,19,20,21 there is still limited knowledge of the potential benefits of using this system in retreatment cases. 22,23 The purpose of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of removing filling materials from oval-shaped root canals using the ProTaper Retreatment System (PTRS), and compare the results with those obtained with the WaveOne System (WS). The time required for gutta-percha removal, the apical extrusion of filling materials and the number of instrument fractures were also evaluated.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

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

et al. 2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

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.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 89%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

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

et al. 2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…analysis that use sectioning, Micro-CT maintains the integrity of the sample that can be reused. 38,45,46 Previous studies showed a shorter retreatment time when files were used associated with solvent. 6,12 Conversely, the use of Reciproc System without solvent speeded up retreatment time in this study.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Avaliação comparativa da eficácia de um sistema alternativo de remoção de guta-percha com ou sem solvente

Carvalho

Alvares

Sassone

et al. 2017

Rev. Bras. Odontol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: to evaluate the efficacy of Reciproc System, with or without solvent for endodontic filling removal from oval shaped root canals. The time required for gutta-percha removal and the instrument fracture were also evaluated. Material and Methods: forty straight single-rooted premolars were prepared up to a size 30 and filled with gutta-percha and sealer, then randomly assigned to two retreatment groups (n = 20), treated with Reciproc System with or without chloroform (RS+C and RS). For all roots, procedural errors, time of retreatment and apically extruded material were recorded. After retreatment, roots were split longitudinally and then photographed. All images were evaluated with Image Tool software to calculate the percentage of residual material. Kolmogorov Smirnov and t tests were used to determine significant differences at P < .05. Results: no treatment completely removed the root filling material from the root canals. Analysis of the total area did not reveal statistical differences between the two groups (P >.05). Both groups also showed similar results in all tested thirds, with no statistical differences (P >.05). RS without solvent was faster in filling material removal than RS+C (P <.05). For both groups, none of the instruments showed intracanal fracture or visible signs of plastic deformation. Conclusion: taken together, our results demonstrated that Reciproc System used without solvent required less time to remove the same amount of root filling material than Reciproc System with solvent. However, regardless of solvent use, the same cleaning quality was obtained.

show abstract

Minimally Invasive Approach to Endodontic Retreatment and Surgical Endodontics

Zuolo

Pereira²

2020

Minimally Invasive Approaches in Endodontic Practice

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Efficacy of 2 Reciprocating Systems Compared with a Rotary Retreatment System for Gutta-percha Removal

Cited by 121 publications

References 31 publications

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

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

Avaliação comparativa da eficácia de um sistema alternativo de remoção de guta-percha com ou sem solvente

Minimally Invasive Approach to Endodontic Retreatment and Surgical Endodontics

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About