RESUMO
INTRODUCTION: The aim of this study was to evaluate the volume of dentin removal and the volume of remnants of restorative material after the removal of an esthetic restorative coronal set and cervical barrier in endodontically treated mandibular molars with the aid of different magnification methods using 3-dimensional (3D) micro-computed tomographic (micro-CT) morphometric analysis. METHODS: A sample of 30 mandibular first molars (N = 30) was used. All teeth were endodontically treated, and the specimens were initially scanned using micro-CT imaging and reconstructed. The molars were filled by a single-cone technique, and immediately the material at the initial 2-mm cervical level was removed. Cervical barriers were confected using ionomer glass cement with fluorescein 0.1%, filling the 2 mm at the cervical level of the canals and an additional 2 mm as the base. The coronal restoration set was performed using esthetic resin composites. A simulated tooth aging process was performed with 20,000 thermocycling cycles. The sample was distributed into the following 3 groups (n = 10) for the removal of the restoration set and cervical barrier with diamond burs based on the magnification aid: no magnification aid (naked eye), operative microscope aid, and REVEAL device (Design for Vision Inc, Bohemia, NY) aid. After removal, the final 3D micro-CT scanning and reconstruction were conducted with the same parameters as the initial scanning, and superposition of the final and initial scanning was performed. Morphometric analysis was conducted using CTAn software (Bruker microCT, Kontich, Belgium) to assess the volume of remnant restorative material (mm³), the volume of dentin removal (mm³), and the direction and site of dentin removal. Data were analyzed using 1-Way analysis of variance (P < .05). RESULTS: The REVEAL group showed better results regarding the volume of remnant material (3.17 ± 1.65) and the percentage of dentin removal (2.56 ± 1.34). The microscope group showed no statistical difference compared with the REVEAL group regarding dentin removal (3.30 ± 1.48) and was statistically similar to the naked eye group in the volume of remnant material (9.63 ± 4.33). The naked eye group showed the worst results for the volume of remnant material (7.60 ± 2.68) and the percentage of dentin removal (6.60 ± 3.70). CONCLUSIONS: The use of fluorescence associated with magnification was the method that presented the best results, with lower percentages of dentin removal and smaller volumes of remaining restorative material. This is an innovative technology in endodontics that shows potential to overcome the challenge of reaccessing root canals in the context of endodontic retreatment.