INTRODUCTION: This study evaluated filling material removal from distal oval-shaped canals of mandibular molars with rotary, reciprocating, and adaptive motion systems by using micro-computed tomography. METHODS: After cone-beam computed tomography scanning, 21 teeth were selected, prepared up to a size 40 file, root filled, and divided into 3 groups (n = 7) according to the filling material removal technique: group PTUR, ProTaper Universal Retreatment combined with ProTaper Universal F2, F3, F4, and F5 files; group RP, Reciproc R50 file; and group TFA: TF Adaptive 50.04 files. The specimens were scanned preoperatively and postoperatively to assess filling material removal by using micro-computed tomography imaging, and the percent volume of residual filling material was calculated. RESULTS: The statistical analysis showed the lowest percent volume of residual filling material at the coronal third in all groups (P < .05). There was no significant difference among the systems in the coronal third (P > .05). In the middle third, group TFA (31.2 ± 10.1) showed lower volume of residual filling material than group RP (52.4 ± 14.1) (P < .05). In the apical third, groups TFA (44.8 ± 20.6) and PTUR (48.6 ± 16.8) presented a lower percent volume of filling material than group RP (70.6 ± 7.2) (P < .05), as confirmed by the qualitative analysis. CONCLUSIONS: The use of the adaptive motion increased the amount of root filling removed in the middle and apical thirds compared with the reciprocating motion. However, no technique was able to completely remove the filling material from the canals.
INTRODUCTION: This study evaluated filling material removal from distal oval-shaped canals of mandibular molars with rotary, reciprocating, and adaptive motion systems by using micro-computed tomography. METHODS: After cone-beam computed tomography scanning, 21 teeth were selected, prepared up to a size 40 file, root filled, and divided into 3 groups (n = 7) according to the filling material removal technique: group PTUR, ProTaper Universal Retreatment combined with ProTaper Universal F2, F3, F4, and F5 files; group RP, Reciproc R50 file; and group TFA: TF Adaptive 50.04 files. The specimens were scanned preoperatively and postoperatively to assess filling material removal by using micro-computed tomography imaging, and the percent volume of residual filling material was calculated. RESULTS: The statistical analysis showed the lowest percent volume of residual filling material at the coronal third in all groups (P < .05). There was no significant difference among the systems in the coronal third (P > .05). In the middle third, group TFA (31.2 ± 10.1) showed lower volume of residual filling material than group RP (52.4 ± 14.1) (P < .05). In the apical third, groups TFA (44.8 ± 20.6) and PTUR (48.6 ± 16.8) presented a lower percent volume of filling material than group RP (70.6 ± 7.2) (P < .05), as confirmed by the qualitative analysis. CONCLUSIONS: The use of the adaptive motion increased the amount of root filling removed in the middle and apical thirds compared with the reciprocating motion. However, no technique was able to completely remove the filling material from the canals.