Comparative Efficacy of Three Different Retreatment Rotary Instrument Systems for Removal of Gutta-Percha from Root Canals: A Comparative in Vitro Study Antony Jasmine Mary1, Kudva Aravind R.2,*, Shetty Harish K3, Kini Shravan4, Gowri Sree4 1Post graduate Student, Department of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, Yenepoya Dental College, Deralakatte 2Reader, Department of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, Yenepoya Dental College, Deralakatte 3Senior Prof & Head of the Department Department of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, Yenepoya Dental College, Deralakatte 4Reader, Department of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, Yenepoya Dental College, Deralakatte *Corresponding Author: Dr Aravind R. Kudva, Reader and Guide, Department of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, Yenepoya Dental College, Deralakatte-575018
Online published on 6 April, 2019. Abstract Introduction Failures of endodontic treatment requiring re-treatment contain a tremendous dimension of patients. Complete removal of gutta-percha from root canal walls, reestablishing working length, disinfection and re-obturating the root canal are the main goals of non-surgical retreatment to obtain predictable success. Aim The aim of this study is to compare the efficacy of three rotary instrumentation systems that is protaper retreatment system, Mtwo Retreatment Files and Neoendo Retreatment Files for removal of gutta-percha from root canal. Materials and Method Thirty freshly extracted, single-rooted human teeth were instrumented with Protaper Gold rotary file system, and each root canal was filled with gutta-percha and AH Plus (Dentsply Detrey, Konstanz, Germany) sealer using lateral compaction.specimens were divided randomly into three groups of 10 specimens each. The removal of gutta-percha was performed using protaper retreatment files, Mtwo retreatment files, and Neoendo files after 1 week. The amount of root canal filling materialremnant was measured using stereomicroscope and computer image analysis program. Results In Mtwo on an average gutta percha remaining on root canal wall was 11.9 ±1.5, in Protaper system it was 6.66 ± 1.56 and in Neoendo system it was 2.08 ± 1.42. Conclusion Neoendo is better with least remaining gutta percha compared to Protaper compared to Mtwo Retreatment files. Top Keywords Protaper retreatment files, Root canal retreatment, Mtwo retreatment files, Neoendo retreatment files. Top |