RESUMEN
Introduction: The aim of nonsurgical retreatment is to remove the previous filling material followed by chemo-mechanical preparation of the canal to achieve proper disinfection of the root canal system. This is then followed by re-obturation. This study evaluates the time taken to retrieve the gutta-percha and the quantity of remaining filling material after retreatment with two different file systems. The quantity of remaining filling material was assessed using nano-computed tomography (CT) due to its increased accuracy. Materials and Methods: Forty extracted single-rooted teeth were split into two groups at random and decoronated and obturated at a standard root length of 16 mm. Solite RS3 (SRS-3) Retreatment and ProTaper Universal Retreatment (PTUR) systems were used to retrieve the gutta-percha after a preoperative nano-CT scan. Postoperative nano-CT scan was taken and both the scans were superimposed to quantify the remaining filling material. The time taken to remove gutta-percha was measured using a stopwatch. The statistical analysis comparing the two groups was conducted using the independent t-test. Results: The quantitative analysis of remaining filling material using nano-CT showed no statistical difference between both the file systems used (P > 0.05). However, SRS-3 took significantly less time in the removal of gutta-percha (P < 0.05). Conclusion: Hence, we can conclude that there is no significant difference in the amount of remaining filling material between both the file systems. However, time taken to remove the gutta-percha was lesser in SRS-3 compared to PTUR file system.
RESUMEN
AIM AND OBJECTIVE: The main goal was to compare the efficacy of gutta percha (GP) removal from the root canal using the Neo Endo Retreatment file system, Solite RS3, and ProTaper Universal Retreatment (PTUR) files with and without magnification under a direct operative microscope using stereomicroscopic evaluation. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Sixty single-rooted teeth were randomly assigned to one of three groups after obturation till F2 mastercone with resin sealer: Group 1 (n=20): Neo Endo Retreatment Files, Group 2 (n=20): Solite RS3, Group 3 (n=20): PTUR files. Each group was further separated into two subgroups: Subgroup 1: without magnification (no direct operative microscope) and Subgroup 2: with magnification under a direct operative microscope at 12× magnification. After retreatment, the roots were grooved buccolingually and split into two halves using a diamond disc with the help of a chisel. The samples were examined under a stereomicroscope. Images were captured in a digital camera and analyzed using image analyzing software Image Pro v10 (Media Cybernetics). RESULTS: The Neo Endo retreatment file system had a significantly greater percentage of remaining obturating material than the Solite RS3 Retreatment and PTUR file systems (p<0.05) in both groups with and without magnification. In the group without magnification, Solite RS3 showed a significant difference compared to ProTaper (p<0.05). In the group with magnification, there was no significant difference between the ProTaper Universal retreatment file system and Solite RS3 (p=0.589). Retreatment performed without magnification had more remnant GP when compared to the retreatment procedure performed under magnification of the direct operative microscope. CONCLUSION: Under stereomicroscopic evaluation, the remnant GP was higher in the Neo Endo File System both with and without magnification than in the Solite Retreatment and PTUR file systems. ProTaper showed moderate significance in removing the obturation than Solite RS3 in the magnification group. The Solite RS3 file system performed as efficiently as the PTUR file system.