Affiliation:
1. İSTANBUL OKAN ÜNİVERSİTESİ, DİŞ HEKİMLİĞİ FAKÜLTESİ, KLİNİK BİLİMLER BÖLÜMÜ
2. KIRIKKALE ÜNİVERSİTESİ, DİŞ HEKİMLİĞİ FAKÜLTESİ
Abstract
Background: The aim of this study is to compare the efficacy of XP-endo finisher R file and PIPS technique using Er: YAG laser on removal of gutta-percha in root canals obturated with two different obturation techniques.
Methods: The root canals of sixty single-rooted teeth were prepared with ProTaper Next Rotary instruments up to X3 (Dentsply, Ballaigues, Switzerland). Half of the root canals were obturated with cold lateral condensation technique and the other half with System B technique (Kerr Corporation, CA, USA) and BioRoot RCS sealer (Setodent, Louisville, USA) was used in all groups as a root canal sealer. After one week, all root canals were retreated using Protaper Universal retreatment instruments (Dentsply, Ballaigues, Switzerland) and enlarged to ProTaper Next X5 File at the working length. Both groups were divided into 3 subgroups according to the additional cleaning methods: control group without an additional cleaning method, XP-endo Finisher R or PIPS technique using Er: YAG laser. Finally, all teeth were split longitudinally and images were taken using an operation microscope (Carl Zeiss, Heidelberg, Germany). The images were analyzed by Image J program. Two-way ANOVA and Tukey tests were used for statistical analysis.
Results: There was a statistically significant difference between the canal filling techniques applied in the evaluation of remnants (p=0.010). There was no significant difference between additional cleaning methods (p=0.196).
Conclusion: Within the limitations of this study, cleanliness is more difficult in root canals obturated with System B technique. Use of additional cleaning method was not effective in removal of root canal filling materials.
Reference30 articles.
1. 1. Ng YL, Mann V, Gulabivala K. A prospective study of the factors affecting outcomes of non-surgical root canal treatment: part 2: tooth survival. Int Endod J. 2011;44(7):610-625.
2. 2. Khedmat S, Azari A, Shamshiri AR, Fadae M, Fakhar HB. Efficacy of ProTaper and Mtwo Retreatment Files in Removal of Gutta-percha and GuttaFlow from Root Canals. Iran Endod J. 2016;11(3):184-187.
3. 3. Zuolo AS, Mello Jr JE, Cunha RS, Zuolo ML, Bueno CES. Efficacy of reciprocating and rotary techniques for removing filling material during root canal retreatment. Int Endod J. 2013;46(10):947-53.
4. 4. Pinto de Oliveira D, Vicente Baroni Barbizam J, Trope M, Teixeira FB. Comparison between gutta-percha and resilon removal using two different techniques in endodontic retreatment. J Endod. 2006;32(4):362–4.
5. 5. Alves FR, Marceliano-Alves MF, Sousa JCN, Silveira SB, Provenzano JC, Siqueira Jr, JF. Removal of root canal fillings in curved canals using either reciprocating single-or rotary multi-instrument systems and a supplementary step with the XP-Endo Finisher. J Endod. 2016;42(7):1114-1119.