Cleanliness of Canal Walls Following Gutta-Percha Removal with Hand Files, RaCe and RaCe Plus XP-Endo Finisher Instruments: A Photographic Analysis

Overview

Journal Iran Endod J

Date 2017 May 18

PMID 28512494

Citations 17

Authors

Kasra Karamifar

Neda Mehrasa

Pouyan Pardis

Mohammad Ali Saghiri

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Introduction: Gutta-percha must be removed from the root canal space during retreatment to ensure a more favorable outcome. The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy of hand instruments, RaCe and RaCe plus XP-endo finisher instruments in removal of gutta-percha from root canal walls during retreatment.

Methods And Materials: Thirty single-rooted premolars were prepared, obturated, and divided into three groups according to retreatment method; in group 1, retreatment was carried out by hand instruments, while in groups 2 and 3 retreatment was done using RaCe rotary files alone or accompanied by XP-endo finisher instruments, respectively. After retreatment, teeth were sectioned longitudinally and photographic images were taken. The amount of remaining gutta-percha in coronal, middle and apical thirds was quantified using Image J software. The two-way ANOVA and post hoc Tukey's tests were used to analyze data. The level of significance was set at 0.05.

Results: RaCe cleaned the apical third significantly better than hand instrumentation. In the coronal third, RaCe+XP-endo finisher was more effective than RaCe. RaCe+XP-endo finisher was more effective than hand instrumentation in the entire root canal. The amount of remaining gutta-percha was the least in the apical part and increased toward the coronal part with the use of XP-endo finisher (<0.05).

Conclusion: Rotary instrumentation was more effective in removing gutta-percha from the canal walls. Furthermore, use of XP-endo finisher file resulted in cleaner canal walls and was more effective in removing gutta-percha from the coronal toward the apical part of the canal.

Citing Articles

Cleaning Ability of Gentlefile Rotary System Compared with Three Alternative Brands.

Abdollahi A, Ghotbi Rad F, Amani R, Saadat M Iran Endod J. 2024; 19(4):270-277.

PMID: 39469515 PMC: 11512708. DOI: 10.22037/iej.v19i4.45012.

Evaluation of Canal Transportation and Centering Ability of RaCe and Af f-one Systems by Cone-beam Computed Tomography: An Study.

Mokhtari H, Razi S, Rahimi S, Haghighat P, Abedi A, Behrouzpour E Iran Endod J. 2024; 19(3):193-198.

PMID: 39086710 PMC: 11287041. DOI: 10.22037/iej.v19i3.41837.

Comparative Evaluation of Supplementary Cleaning Techniques for Removal of Bio-C Sealer and AH-Plus from Oval Root Canals: A Micro-CT Analysis.

Bincelli Seckler I, Pelegrine R, Stringheta C, Lopes R, de Sa Silva A, Bueno C Iran Endod J. 2024; 19(3):199-207.

PMID: 39086709 PMC: 11287049. DOI: 10.22037/iej.v19i3.43580.

In Vitro Cone Beam CT Analysis of the Efficacy of Three Supplementary Steps In the Removal of Obturation Material in Endodontic Retreatment.

N K, R P, Ravindran S, John J, U S, Rahman F Cureus. 2024; 16(6):e62285.

PMID: 39006571 PMC: 11245723. DOI: 10.7759/cureus.62285.

Comparative Analysis of the Efficacy of Various Retreatment File Systems in the Removal of Gutta-Percha in Retreatment Cases and Time Taken During the Procedure: An In Vitro Cone Beam CT Study.

Singh K, Akhtar M, Nagar R, Agarwal A, Azhar S, Singh V Cureus. 2024; 16(3):e55551.

PMID: 38576634 PMC: 10993640. DOI: 10.7759/cureus.55551.

References

Wilcox L . Endodontic retreatment: ultrasonics and chloroform as the final step in reinstrumentation. J Endod. 1989; 15(3):125-8. DOI: 10.1016/S0099-2399(89)80133-5. View

Bergenholtz G, Lekholm U, Milthon R, Heden G, Odesjo B, Engstrom B . Retreatment of endodontic fillings. Scand J Dent Res. 1979; 87(3):217-24. DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-0722.1979.tb00675.x. View

Schafer E, Vlassis M . Comparative investigation of two rotary nickel-titanium instruments: ProTaper versus RaCe. Part 2. Cleaning effectiveness and shaping ability in severely curved root canals of extracted teeth. Int Endod J. 2004; 37(4):239-48. DOI: 10.1111/j.0143-2885.2004.00783.x. View

Zanettini P, Barletta F, Rahde N . In vitro comparison of different reciprocating systems used during endodontic retreatment. Aust Endod J. 2008; 34(3):80-5. DOI: 10.1111/j.1747-4477.2007.00060.x. View

Pirani C, Pelliccioni G, Marchionni S, Montebugnoli L, Piana G, Prati C . Effectiveness of three different retreatment techniques in canals filled with compacted gutta-percha or Thermafil: a scanning electron microscope study. J Endod. 2009; 35(10):1433-40. DOI: 10.1016/j.joen.2009.06.002. View

Tasdemir T, Er K, Yildirim T, Celik D . Efficacy of three rotary NiTi instruments in removing gutta-percha from root canals. Int Endod J. 2007; 41(3):191-6. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2591.2007.01335.x. View

Lottanti S, Gautschi H, Sener B, Zehnder M . Effects of ethylenediaminetetraacetic, etidronic and peracetic acid irrigation on human root dentine and the smear layer. Int Endod J. 2009; 42(4):335-43. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2591.2008.01514.x. View

Rodig T, Kupis J, Konietschke F, Dullin C, Drebenstedt S, Hulsmann M . Comparison of hand and rotary instrumentation for removing gutta-percha from previously treated curved root canals: a microcomputed tomography study. Int Endod J. 2013; 47(2):173-82. DOI: 10.1111/iej.12128. View

Jeng H, ElDeeb M . Removal of hard paste fillings from the root canal by ultrasonic instrumentation. J Endod. 1987; 13(6):295-8. DOI: 10.1016/S0099-2399(87)80047-X. View

10.

Kfir A, Tsesis I, Yakirevich E, Matalon S, Abramovitz I . The efficacy of five techniques for removing root filling material: microscopic versus radiographic evaluation. Int Endod J. 2011; 45(1):35-41. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2591.2011.01944.x. View

11.

Aydin B, Kose T, Caliskan M . Effectiveness of HERO 642 versus Hedström files for removing gutta-percha fillings in curved root canals: an ex vivo study. Int Endod J. 2009; 42(11):1050-6. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2591.2009.01624.x. View

12.

Ring J, Murray P, Namerow K, Moldauer B, Garcia-Godoy F . Removing root canal obturation materials: a comparison of rotary file systems and re-treatment agents. J Am Dent Assoc. 2009; 140(6):680-8. DOI: 10.14219/jada.archive.2009.0254. View

13.

Somma F, Cammarota G, Plotino G, Grande N, Pameijer C . The effectiveness of manual and mechanical instrumentation for the retreatment of three different root canal filling materials. J Endod. 2008; 34(4):466-9. DOI: 10.1016/j.joen.2008.02.008. View

14.

Tachinami H, Katsuumi I . Removal of root canal filling materials using Er:YAG laser irradiation. Dent Mater J. 2010; 29(3):246-52. DOI: 10.4012/dmj.2008-079. View

15.

Unal G, Kaya B, Tac A, Kececi A . A comparison of the efficacy of conventional and new retreatment instruments to remove gutta-percha in curved root canals: an ex vivo study. Int Endod J. 2009; 42(4):344-50. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2591.2008.01518.x. View

16.

Rocas I, Jung I, Lee C, Siqueira Jr J . Polymerase chain reaction identification of microorganisms in previously root-filled teeth in a South Korean population. J Endod. 2004; 30(7):504-8. View

17.

Saghiri M, Karamifar K, Mehrvazfar P, Asgar K, Gutmann J, Lotfi M . The efficacy of foam cleaners in removing debris from two endodontic instruments. Quintessence Int. 2012; 43(9):811-7. View

18.

Marfisi K, Mercade M, Plotino G, Duran-Sindreu F, Bueno R, Roig M . Efficacy of three different rotary files to remove gutta-percha and Resilon from root canals. Int Endod J. 2010; 43(11):1022-8. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2591.2010.01758.x. View

19.

Tasdemir T, Yildirim T, Celik D . Comparative study of removal of current endodontic fillings. J Endod. 2008; 34(3):326-9. DOI: 10.1016/j.joen.2007.12.022. View

20.

Giuliani V, Cocchetti R, Pagavino G . Efficacy of ProTaper universal retreatment files in removing filling materials during root canal retreatment. J Endod. 2008; 34(11):1381-1384. DOI: 10.1016/j.joen.2008.08.002. View