Effectiveness of rotary or manual techniques for removing a 6-year-old filling material.

The aim of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of manual and rotary instrumentation techniques for removing root fillings after different storage times. Twenty-four canals from palatal roots of human maxillary molars were instrumented and filled with gutta-percha and zinc-oxide eugenol-based sealer (Endofill) , and were stored in saline for 6 years. Non-aged control specimens were treated in the same manner and stored for 1 week. All canals were retreated using hand files or ProTaper Universal NiTi rotary system. Radiographs were taken to determine the amount of remaining material in the canals. The roots were vertically split, the halves were examined with a clinical microscope and the obtained images were digitized. The images were evaluated with AutoCAD software and the percentage of residual material was calculated. Data were analyzed with two-way ANOVA and Tukey's test at 5% significance level. There was no statistically significant differences (p>0.05) between the manual and rotary techniques for filling material removal regardless the ageing effect on endodontic sealers. When only the age of the filling material was analyzed microscopically, non-aged fillings that remained on the middle third of the canals presented a higher percentage of material remaining (p<0.05) compared to the aged sealers and to the other thirds of the roots. The apical third showed a higher percentage of residual filling material in both radiographic and microscopic analysis when compared to the other root thirds. In conclusion, all canals presented residual filling material after endodontic retreatment procedures. Microscopic analysis was more effective than radiographs for detection of residual filling material.

[1]  G. Piana,et al.  Effectiveness of three different retreatment techniques in canals filled with compacted gutta-percha or Thermafil: a scanning electron microscope study. , 2009, Journal of endodontics.

[2]  F. Barletta,et al.  In vitro comparison of different reciprocating systems used during endodontic retreatment. , 2008, Australian Endodontic Journal.

[3]  N. Silikas,et al.  Three-dimensional evaluation of effectiveness of hand and rotary instrumentation for retreatment of canals filled with different materials. , 2008, Journal of endodontics.

[4]  F. Vier-Pelisser,et al.  Efficacy of ProTaper retreatment system in root canals filled with gutta-percha and two endodontic sealers. , 2008, Journal of endodontics.

[5]  Cornelis H Pameijer,et al.  The effectiveness of manual and mechanical instrumentation for the retreatment of three different root canal filling materials. , 2008, Journal of endodontics.

[6]  J. Ling,et al.  Efficacy of ProTaper Universal rotary retreatment system for gutta-percha removal from root canals. , 2008, International endodontic journal.

[7]  T. Taşdemir,et al.  Comparative study of removal of current endodontic fillings. , 2008, Journal of endodontics.

[8]  C. Sabbagh,et al.  Effectiveness of two nickel-titanium rotary instruments and a hand file for removing gutta-percha in severely curved root canals during retreatment: an ex vivo study. , 2007, International endodontic journal.

[9]  F. Barletta,et al.  In vitro comparative analysis of 2 mechanical techniques for removing gutta-percha during retreatment. , 2007, Journal.

[10]  S. Al-hadlaq,et al.  Efficacy of two rotary NiTi instruments in the removal of Gutta-Percha during root canal retreatment. , 2007, Journal of endodontics.

[11]  M. Scelza,et al.  Efficacy of automated versus hand instrumentation during root canal retreatment: an ex vivo study. , 2006 .

[12]  O. Zmener,et al.  Retreatment efficacy of hand versus automated instrumentation in oval-shaped root canals: an ex vivo study. , 2006, International endodontic journal.

[13]  K. M. Meyer,et al.  Detectability of residual Epiphany and gutta-percha after root canal retreatment using a dental operating microscope and radiographs--an ex vivo study. , 2006, International endodontic journal.

[14]  Jianing He,et al.  Efficacy of retreatment techniques for a resin-based root canal obturation material. , 2006, Journal of endodontics.

[15]  M. Trope,et al.  Comparison between gutta-percha and resilon removal using two different techniques in endodontic retreatment. , 2006, Journal of endodontics.

[16]  N. Economides,et al.  Ex vivo study of the efficacy of H-files and rotary Ni-Ti instruments to remove gutta-percha and four types of sealer. , 2006, International endodontic journal.

[17]  M. Zaccaro Scelza,et al.  Efficacy of automated versus hand instrumentation during root canal retreatment: an ex vivo study. , 2006, International endodontic journal.

[18]  F. Barletta,et al.  Effectiveness of different techniques for removing gutta-percha during retreatment. , 2005, International endodontic journal.

[19]  M. Hülsmann,et al.  Efficacy, cleaning ability and safety of different rotary NiTi instruments in root canal retreatment. , 2004, International endodontic journal.

[20]  K. Barrieshi-Nusair.  Gutta-percha retreatment: effectiveness of nickel-titanium rotary instruments versus stainless steel hand files. , 2002, Journal of endodontics.

[21]  M. Hülsmann,et al.  Efficacy, cleaning ability and safety of different devices for gutta-percha removal in root canal retreatment. , 1997, International endodontic journal.