I Bago1, M Suk1, M Katić2, D Gabrić3, I Anić1. 1. Department of Endodontics and Restorative Dentistry, School of Dental Medicine, Zagreb, Croatia. 2. Department of Quality, Faculty of Mechanical Engineering and Naval Architecture, Zagreb, Croatia. 3. Department of Oral Surgery, School of Dental Medicine, University of Zagreb, Zagreb, Croatia.
Abstract
AIM: To compare the Reciproc Blue, Reciproc and ProTaper Universal Retreatment systems with regard to the effective removal of epoxy resin-based sealer and gutta-percha during the retreatment of oval, straight root canals. METHODOLOGY: Forty-five extracted, human mandibular first premolars with single straight oval canals were selected on the basis of cone beam computed tomography evaluations. The root canals were instrumented with the ProTaper Next system up to the X2 file, and filled with gutta-percha and epoxy resin-based sealer using the cold lateral condensation technique. After 1 month, the samples were randomly divided into three groups (n = 15) according to the retreatment system used: Reciproc Blue R40, Reciproc R40 and ProTaper Universal. The specimens were scanned at the resolution of 1.2 μm by a microcomputed tomography device after the root filling and retreatment procedures, and the decrease in the volume of filling material after each retreatment protocol was measured. The results were analysed using the Kruskal-Wallis test and additional box-and-whisker plots. RESULTS: Although the volume of the filling material decreased significantly in all three groups (P < 0.05), none of the systems removed the material completely. The Reciproc system removed significantly more material than the ProTaper Universal (P < 0.001) and Reciproc Blue (P = 0.005) systems, with the latter two exhibiting equal volumes of remaining material (P = 0.068). CONCLUSION: The Reciproc system was more effective than the Reciproc Blue and ProTaper Universal Retreatment systems during the removal of filling material from oval, straight canals, although none of the systems completely removed the filling material.
AIM: To compare the Reciproc Blue, Reciproc and ProTaper Universal Retreatment systems with regard to the effective removal of epoxy resin-based sealer and gutta-percha during the retreatment of oval, straight root canals. METHODOLOGY: Forty-five extracted, human mandibular first premolars with single straight oval canals were selected on the basis of cone beam computed tomography evaluations. The root canals were instrumented with the ProTaper Next system up to the X2 file, and filled with gutta-percha and epoxy resin-based sealer using the cold lateral condensation technique. After 1 month, the samples were randomly divided into three groups (n = 15) according to the retreatment system used: Reciproc Blue R40, Reciproc R40 and ProTaper Universal. The specimens were scanned at the resolution of 1.2 μm by a microcomputed tomography device after the root filling and retreatment procedures, and the decrease in the volume of filling material after each retreatment protocol was measured. The results were analysed using the Kruskal-Wallis test and additional box-and-whisker plots. RESULTS: Although the volume of the filling material decreased significantly in all three groups (P < 0.05), none of the systems removed the material completely. The Reciproc system removed significantly more material than the ProTaper Universal (P < 0.001) and Reciproc Blue (P = 0.005) systems, with the latter two exhibiting equal volumes of remaining material (P = 0.068). CONCLUSION: The Reciproc system was more effective than the Reciproc Blue and ProTaper Universal Retreatment systems during the removal of filling material from oval, straight canals, although none of the systems completely removed the filling material.
Authors: Matthew W Hatzke; Francesca C Daigle; Robert A Augsburger; Matthew J Kesterke; Poorya Jalali Journal: J Endod Date: 2020-06-15 Impact factor: 4.171
Authors: Ahmad A Madarati; Aya M N Sammani; Ahmad A Alnazzawi; Ali Alrahlah; Eugenio Pedullà Journal: BMC Oral Health Date: 2022-08-17 Impact factor: 3.747