Evaluation of the efficacy of two kinds of NiTi retreatment instruments for removing filling material during root canal retreatment

doi:10.19439/j.sjos.2017.03.007

Abstract

Abstract: PURPOSE: To compare the efficacy of Mtwo R and Reciproc with that of hand files in removing filling material during root canal retreatment. METHODS: The root canals of forty-five human extracted mandibular central incisors were cleaned and shaped to a size 40 and filled with gutta-percha and sealer using a lateral compaction technique. The teeth were divided into 3 groups. The filling material was removed with hand files, Mtwo R and Reciproc, respectively. The debris extruded out of the apical foramen was collected and weighted. The working time was recorded. Then the teeth were split longitudinally, observed under microscope, and evaluated. The data were statistically analyzed with SPSS 13.0 software package. RESULTS: There was no significant difference among 3 groups for debris extrusion (P>0.05). Removal of filling material with Mtwo R and Reciproc consumed less time (P<0.05). CONCLUTIONS: NiTi retreatment instruments can not remove all filling material during root canal retreatment, but can reduce working time.

Key words: Mtwo R, Reciproc, NiTi, Root canal retreatment

CLC Number:

R781.05

LI Jin-heng, WU Tian-tian, HE hong, HAN Jun-li. Evaluation of the efficacy of two kinds of NiTi retreatment instruments for removing filling material during root canal retreatment[J]. Shanghai Journal of Stomatology, 2017, 26(3): 268-271.

References

[1] Shirrmeister JF, Wrbas KT, Schneider FH, et al. Effectiveness of a hand file and three nickel-titanium rotary instruments for removing gutta-percha in curved root canals during retreatment [J]. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod, 2006, 101(5): 542-547.
[2] Schneider SW. A comparison of canal preparations in straight and curved root canals[J]. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol, 1971, 32(2): 271-275.
[3] 谭青松, 陶小玲, 彭彬. 镍钛再治疗器械去根管充填材料后的器械损伤评价[J]. 牙体牙髓牙周病学杂志, 2014, 24(6): 346-349.
[4] Silva EJ, Sá L, Belladonna FG, et al. Reciprocating versus rotary systems for root filling removal: assessment of the apically extruded material [J]. J Endod, 2014, 40(12): 2077-2080.
[5] Betti LV, Bramante CM. Quantec SC rotary instruments versus hand files for gutta-percha removal in root canal retreatment [J]. Int Endod J, 2001, 34(7): 514-519.
[6] Nicopoulou-Karayianni K, Brägger U, Bürgin W, et al. Diagnosis of alveolar bone changes with digital subtraction images and conventional radiographs. An in vitro study [J]. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol, 1991, 72(2): 251-256.
[7] Rahnama M. Bone mineral content of the mandible and spine in ovariectomized rats with estrogen deficiency [J]. Ann Univ Mariae Curie Sklodowska Med, 2004, 59(2): 543-546.
[8] Sae-Lim V, Rajamanickam I, Lim BK, et al. Effectiveness of ProFile.04 taper rotary instruments in endodontic retreatment [J]. Endod J, 2000, 26(2): 100-104.
[9] Roggendorf MJ, Legner M, Ebert J, et al. Micro-CT evaluation of residual material in canals filled with Activ GP or GuttaFlow following removal with NiTi instruments [J]. Int Endod J, 2010, 43(3): 200-209.
[10] Marques da Silva B, Baratto-Filho F, Leonardi DP, et al. Effectiveness of ProTaper, D-RaCe, and Mtwo retreatment files with and without supplementary instruments in the removal of root canal filling material [J]. Int Endod J, 2012, 45(10): 927-932.
[11] de Carvalho Maciel AC, Zaccaro Scelza MF. Efficacy of automated versus hand instrumentation during root canal retreatment: an ex vivo study [J]. Int Endod J, 2006, 39(10): 779-784.
[12] Somma F, Cammarota G, Plofino G, et al. The effectiveness of manual and mechanical instrumentation for the retreatment of three different root canal filling materials[J]. J Endod, 2008, 34(4): 469-499.
[13] Schirrmeister JF, Strohl C, Altenburger MJ, et al. Shaping ability and safety of five different rotary nickel-titanium instruments compared with stainless steel hand instrumentation in simulated curved root canals [J]. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod, 2006, 101(6): 807-813.
[14] Kfir A, Tsesis I, Yakirevich E, et al. The efficacy of five techniques for removing root filling material: microscopic versus radiographic evaluation [J]. Inter Endod J, 2012, 45(1): 35-41.
[15] de Mello junior JE, Cunha RS, Bueno CE, et al. Retreatment efficacy of gutta-percha removal using a clinical microscope and ultrasonic instruments: part I-an ex vivo study [J]. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod, 2009, 108(1): e59-62.
[16] Kosti E, Lambrianidis T, Economides N, 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[J] . Int Endod J, 2006, 39(1): 48-54.
[17] Tasdemir T, Er k, Yildirim T, et al. Efficacy of three rotary NiTi instruments in removing gutta-percha from root canals [J]. Int Endod J, 2008, 41(3):191-196.