» Articles » PMID: 39727441

Quantitative Assessment of Apically Extruded Debris During Retreatment Procedures Using Three Nickel-Titanium Rotary Systems: An In Vitro Comparative Study

Overview
Journal Dent J (Basel)
Specialty Dentistry
Date 2024 Dec 27
PMID 39727441
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

: Apical extrusion of debris can affect the success of endodontic treatments, and the specific performance of certain retreatment systems has not been studied yet. Therefore, the aim of this in vitro study was to quantitatively assess the amount of apically extruded debris produced during retreatment procedures using three rotary NiTi retreatment systems in mature non-resorbed straight roots. : Thirty extracted permanent human teeth with single straight roots were selected. The root canals were prepared with the ProTaper Next system up to size 30 and obturated with gutta-percha and AH Plus sealer using the continuous wave of condensation technique. The samples were stored for 30 days and randomized by computer sequence into three retreatment groups (n = 10): (1) ProTaper Universal Retreatment; (2) HyFlex Remover; and (3) VDW.Rotate Retreatment. Apically extruded debris was collected in Eppendorf tubes and weighed with a microbalance (10 g) before and after retreatment procedure. As the data were not normally distributed, the Kruskal-Wallis test was applied for comparing data among groups, with an alpha level set at α = 0.05. Dunn's test was considered for post-hoc analyses, if appropriate. : Hyflex Remover was associated with the highest amount of extruded debris (0.85 ± 0.82 mg), followed by VDW.Rotate Retreatment (0.78 ± 0.41 mg) and ProTaper Universal Retreatment (0.62 ± 0.28 mg). However, the differences were not statistically significant ( > 0.05). : All the retreatment systems tested were associated with apical extrusion of debris in vitro, with no significant quantitative differences between them, suggesting that clinicians can choose a retreatment system with features appropriate to the specific clinical situation without risk of increasing the amount of apically extruded debris.

References
1.
Myers G, Montgomery S . A comparison of weights of debris extruded apically by conventional filing and Canal Master techniques. J Endod. 1991; 17(6):275-9. DOI: 10.1016/S0099-2399(06)81866-2. View

2.
Keskin C, Sariyilmaz E . Apically extruded debris and irrigants during root canal filling material removal using Reciproc Blue, WaveOne Gold, R-Endo and ProTaper Next systems. J Dent Res Dent Clin Dent Prospects. 2019; 12(4):272-276. PMC: 6368952. DOI: 10.15171/joddd.2018.042. View

3.
Siqueira Jr J . Microbial causes of endodontic flare-ups. Int Endod J. 2003; 36(7):453-63. DOI: 10.1046/j.1365-2591.2003.00671.x. View

4.
Silva E, Sa L, Belladonna F, Neves A, Accorsi-Mendonca T, Vieira V . Reciprocating versus rotary systems for root filling removal: assessment of the apically extruded material. J Endod. 2014; 40(12):2077-80. DOI: 10.1016/j.joen.2014.09.009. View

5.
Siqueira Jr J, Rocas I, Favieri A, Machado A, Gahyva S, Oliveira J . Incidence of postoperative pain after intracanal procedures based on an antimicrobial strategy. J Endod. 2002; 28(6):457-60. DOI: 10.1097/00004770-200206000-00010. View