Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Efficacy of 2 reciprocating systems compared with a rotary retreatment system for gutta-percha removal.
Rios, Marcos de Azevêdo; Villela, Alexandre Mascarenhas; Cunha, Rodrigo Sanches; Velasco, Rafael Cortez; De Martin, Alexandre Sigrist; Kato, Augusto Shoji; Bueno, Carlos Eduardo da Silveira.
Afiliação
  • Rios Mde A; Department of Endodontics, Dental Research Center, São Leopoldo Mandic University, Campinas, São Paulo, Brazil.
  • Villela AM; Department of Endodontics, Sete Lagoas Dental Research Center, Salvador, Bahia, Brazil.
  • Cunha RS; Division of Endodontics, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada.
  • Velasco RC; Department of Endodontics, Dental Research Center, São Leopoldo Mandic University, Campinas, São Paulo, Brazil.
  • De Martin AS; Department of Endodontics, Dental Research Center, São Leopoldo Mandic University, Campinas, São Paulo, Brazil.
  • Kato AS; Department of Endodontics, Dental Research Center, São Leopoldo Mandic University, Campinas, São Paulo, Brazil.
  • Bueno CE; Department of Endodontics, Dental Research Center, São Leopoldo Mandic University, Campinas, São Paulo, Brazil. Electronic address: carlosesbueno@terra.com.br.
J Endod ; 40(4): 543-6, 2014 Apr.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-24666908
ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION:

The maximum removal of root canal filling material is essential for successful endodontic retreatment. The purpose of this study was to assess the efficacy of 2 reciprocating systems (Reciproc [VDW, Munich, Germany] and WaveOne [Dentsply Maillefer, Ballaigues, Switzerland]) compared with a nickel-titanium (NiTi) rotary system (ProTaper Universal Retreatment [Dentsply Maillefer]) in the removal of root canal filling material.

METHODS:

Sixty root canals of extracted human maxillary incisors were prepared using the NiTi ProTaper rotary system with the complementary use of a #40 K-type file and then obturated. The specimens were divided into 3 groups (n = 20) according to the system used for filling removal group 1 instrument R25 of the Reciproc system, group 2 primary instrument of the WaveOne system, and group 3 NiTi rotary instruments of the ProTaper Universal Retreatment system. The teeth were cleaved longitudinally and photographed under a dental operating microscope with 5 × magnification. Images were transferred to a computer, and residual filling material was quantified using Image Tool software (University of Texas Health Science Center, San Antonio, TX). Results were compared using 1-way analysis of variance (P < .05).

RESULTS:

All teeth examined had filling remnants within the canal. No statistically significant difference (P > .05) in residual filling material was observed among the groups, with 4.30% in group 1, 2.98% in group 2, and 3.14% in group 3.

CONCLUSIONS:

The Reciproc and WaveOne reciprocating systems were as effective as the ProTaper Universal retreatment system for gutta-percha and sealer removal.
Assuntos
Palavras-chave

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Materiais Restauradores do Canal Radicular / Preparo de Canal Radicular / Cavidade Pulpar / Guta-Percha Tipo de estudo: Clinical_trials Limite: Humans Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2014 Tipo de documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Materiais Restauradores do Canal Radicular / Preparo de Canal Radicular / Cavidade Pulpar / Guta-Percha Tipo de estudo: Clinical_trials Limite: Humans Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2014 Tipo de documento: Article