Dental Journal of Advance Studies

Open Access Open Access  Restricted Access Subscription Access

Efficacy of Two Ni-Ti Retreatment Systems and Hand Files in Removing Gutta-Perchaand Sealer from Root Canals Filled with Three Different Types of Sealers


Affiliations
1 Department of Conservative Dentistry & Endodontics, Govt. Dental College & Hospital, Himachal Pradesh,, India
2 Department of Conservative Dentistry & Endodontics Govt. Dental College & Hospital, Himachal Pradesh, India
3 Department of Conservative Dentistry & Endodontics, Govt. Dental College & Hospital, Himachal Pradesh, India
 

This study was undertaken to evaluate the efficiency of two rotary nickel titanium instruments and hand instrumentation in removing gutta-percha and sealer from ischolar_main canals. 63 extracted human single ischolar_mained premolars were instrumented with K-files and filled using lateral compaction of guttapercha (GP) and three different sealers. The teeth were randomly divided into three experimental groups of 21 specimens each. Removal of gutta-percha was performed with R-Endo retreatment files, Mtwo retreatment files and Hedstrom files. Time to reach working length and to eliminate filling material was also recorded. The specimens were sectioned for evaluation of the area of the remaining gutta-percha/sealer under stereomicroscope at 6X magnification. Photographs were taken for further analysis using computer image analysis program. The results were statistically analyzed using Analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Tukey's honestly significant difference test. The R-Endo retreatment system resulted in a smaller percentage of canal area covered by residual GP/sealer than in other groups, a significant difference was found between R-Endo and Mtwo group and between Hedstrom groups (p < 0.001). The Mean operating time was minimum with R-Endo group while it was found to be maximum with hand files. It was concluded that all test techniques left gutta-percha/sealer remnants within the ischolar_main canal. The R-Endo retreatment files and Mtwo retreatment files system proved to be an efficient method for removing gutta-percha and sealer from single ischolar_mained premolars.

Keywords

Gutta-Percha, Root Canal Sealer, Rotary Instruments.
User
Notifications
Font Size

  • DouglasA Direct applications of a nanocomposite resin system: Part I - The evolution of contemporary composite materials. Pract ProcedAesthet Dent 2004;16(6):418.

  • Turkun LS, Aktener BO, Ates M.Clinical evalutation of different posterior resin composite materials:A7-year report. Quint Int 2003;34:418-426.

  • Herrero AA,Yaman P, Dennison JB. Polymerization shrinkage and depth of cure of packable composites. Quint Int 2005;36:25-31.

  • Mitra SB, Wu D, Holmes BN. An application of nanotechnology on advanced dental materials. J Am Dent Assoc. 2003;134:1382–1390.

  • Gupta S, Khinda VIS, Grewal N. A Comparative study of Microleakage below Cemento-enameljunction using Light Cure and Chemically Cured glass lonomer cement liners. J Indian Soc Pedo Prev Dent December 2002; 20(4):158-184.

  • Bayne SC, Thompson JY, Swift EJ, Jr, Stamatiades P, Wilkerson P. A characterization of first generation flowable composites. JAmDentAssoc.1998;129:567–577.

  • Attar N, Tam LE, McComb D. Flow, strength, stiffness and radioopacity of flowable resin composites. J Can Dent Assoc. 2003; 61:516–521.

  • Cobb DS, Macgregor KM, Vargas MA, and Denehy GE. The physical properties of packable and conventional posterior resin-based composites: a comparison. J Am Dent Assoc 2000; 131:1610-1615.

  • HickelR and Manhart J. Longevity of restorations in posterior teeth and reasons for failure. JAdhes Dent 2001; 3:45-64.

  • Peutzfeldt A. Resin composites in dentistry: the monomer systems. Eur J Oral Sci 1997; 105:97–116.

  • Sheth JJ, Jensen ME, Sheth PJ, Versteeg J. Effect of etching glassionomer cements on bond strength to composite resin. J Dent Res 1989; 68:1082-7.

  • Arora V, Kundabala M, Parolia A, Thomas MS, Pai V. Comparison of the shear bond strength of RMGIC to a resin composite using different adhesive systems:An invitro study. J Conserv Dent 2010;13:80-3.

  • Liebenberg WH. Successive cusp build-up: an improved placement technique for posterior direct resin restorations. J Can DentAssoc 1996;62:501-7.

  • Yazici RA, Celik C, Ozgunaltay G. Microleakage of different resin composite types. Quint Int 2004; 23(10):790-794.

  • Van Meerbeek B,Willens G, Celis JP, Roos JR, Lambrechts P, Vanherle G. Assessment by nanoindentation of the hardness and elasticity of the resin–dentin bonding area. J Dent Res 1993; 72:1434–1442.

  • Owens BM (2002). The effect of different drying methods for single step adhesive systems on microleakage of tooth colored restorations J Contemp Dent Pract 3(4):1-10.

  • Sidhu SK, Henderson LJ. In vitro marginal leakage of cervical composite resins restorations lined with a light-cured glass ionomer. Oper Dent 1992;17:7-12.

  • Aboushala A, Kugel G, Hurley E. Class II composite resin restorations using glass- ionomer liners: Microleakage studies. J Clin Pediatr Dent 1996;21:67-70.

  • Tollidos K, Setcos JC. Initial degree of polymerization shrinkage exhibited by flowable composite resins. J Dent Res 1999;78:483-5.

  • Tredwin CJ, StokesA, Moles DR. Influence of flowable liners and margin location on microleakage of conventional and packable class II resin composites. Oper Dent 2005;30:32-8.

  • Chuang SF, JinYT, Liu JK, Chang CH, Shieh DB. Influence of flowable lining thickness on class II composite restorations. Oper Dent 2004;29:301-8.

  • Derhami K, Colli P, Brannstrom M. Microleakage in Class 2 composite restorations. Oper Dent 1995;20:100-5.

  • Demarco FF, Ramos OL, Mota CS, Formolo E, Justino ML. Influence of different restorative techniques on microleakage in class II cavities with gingival wall in cementum. Oper Dent 2001;26:253-9.

  • Ingle JI, Bakland LK, Baumgartner CJ. Ingles Endodontics 6. 6th edition. Hamilton:BCDecker Inc; 2008.

  • Lovdahl PE. Endodontic Retreatment. Dent Clin North Am 1992; 36:473-490.

  • Salehrabi R and Rotstein I. Endodontic treatment outcomes in a large patient population in the USA: an epidemiological study. J Endod 2004; 30:846-850.

  • Paik S, Sechrist C, Torabinejad M. Levels of evidence for the outcome of endodontic retreatment. J Endod 2004; 30:745-750.

  • Kvist T, Reit C. Postoperative discomfort associated with surgical and nonsurgical endodontic retreatment. Endod Dent Traumatol 2000; 16:71-74.

  • Gorni FG, Gagliani MM. The outcome of endodontic retreatment: a 2-yr follow-up. J Endod 2004; 30:1-4.

  • Barletta FB, Rahde Nde M, Limongi O, Moura AA, Zanesco C, Mazocatto G. In vitro comparative analysis of 2 mechanical techniques for removing gutta-percha during retreatment. J Can DentAssoc 2007; 73:65.

  • Ruddle CJ. Nonsurgical retreatment. In: Cohen S, Burns RC, eds. Pathways of the pulp (ed 8). St Louis, MO: CV Mosby; 2002:875-930.

  • Viduèiae D, Juki S, Karlovi Z, Boi , Mileti I, Ani I. Removal of gutta-percha from ischolar_main canals using an Nd:YAG laser. Int Endod J 2003; 36:670 –673.

  • Imura N, Pinheiro ET, Gomes BP, ZaiaAA, Ferraz CC, SouzaFilho FJ. The outcome of endodontic treatment: a retrospective study of 2000 cases performed by a specialist. J Endod 2007; 33:1278–1282.

  • Tronstad L, Niemczyk SP. Efficacy and safety tests of six automated devices for ischolar_main canal instrumentation. Endod Dent Traumatol 1986; 2:270–276.

  • Gu LS, Ling JQ, Wei X, Huang XY. Efficacy of ProTaper Universal rotary retreatment system for gutta-percha removal from ischolar_main canals. Int Endod J 2008; 41, 288–295.

  • Tasdemir T, Yildirim T, Celik D. Comparative study of removal of current endodontic fillings. J Endod 2008; 34:326 –329.


Abstract Views: 238

PDF Views: 99




  • Efficacy of Two Ni-Ti Retreatment Systems and Hand Files in Removing Gutta-Perchaand Sealer from Root Canals Filled with Three Different Types of Sealers

Abstract Views: 238  |  PDF Views: 99

Authors

Rajender Singh
Department of Conservative Dentistry & Endodontics, Govt. Dental College & Hospital, Himachal Pradesh,, India
Ashu Gupta
Department of Conservative Dentistry & Endodontics Govt. Dental College & Hospital, Himachal Pradesh, India
Vishal Sharma
Department of Conservative Dentistry & Endodontics, Govt. Dental College & Hospital, Himachal Pradesh, India

Abstract


This study was undertaken to evaluate the efficiency of two rotary nickel titanium instruments and hand instrumentation in removing gutta-percha and sealer from ischolar_main canals. 63 extracted human single ischolar_mained premolars were instrumented with K-files and filled using lateral compaction of guttapercha (GP) and three different sealers. The teeth were randomly divided into three experimental groups of 21 specimens each. Removal of gutta-percha was performed with R-Endo retreatment files, Mtwo retreatment files and Hedstrom files. Time to reach working length and to eliminate filling material was also recorded. The specimens were sectioned for evaluation of the area of the remaining gutta-percha/sealer under stereomicroscope at 6X magnification. Photographs were taken for further analysis using computer image analysis program. The results were statistically analyzed using Analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Tukey's honestly significant difference test. The R-Endo retreatment system resulted in a smaller percentage of canal area covered by residual GP/sealer than in other groups, a significant difference was found between R-Endo and Mtwo group and between Hedstrom groups (p < 0.001). The Mean operating time was minimum with R-Endo group while it was found to be maximum with hand files. It was concluded that all test techniques left gutta-percha/sealer remnants within the ischolar_main canal. The R-Endo retreatment files and Mtwo retreatment files system proved to be an efficient method for removing gutta-percha and sealer from single ischolar_mained premolars.

Keywords


Gutta-Percha, Root Canal Sealer, Rotary Instruments.

References