The Journal of Contemporary Dental Practice

Register      Login

SEARCH WITHIN CONTENT

FIND ARTICLE

Volume / Issue

Online First

Archive
Related articles

VOLUME 14 , ISSUE 4 ( July-August, 2013 ) > List of Articles

RESEARCH ARTICLE

Comparative Analysis of Efficacy and Cleaning Ability of Hand and Rotary Devices for Gutta-Percha Removal in Root Canal Retreatment: An in vitro Study

Srikanth Pasari, Narender Reddy, Shilpa Reddy Admala, Sainath Dinapadu, Manoranjan P Reddy, MS Rama Rao

Citation Information : Pasari S, Reddy N, Admala SR, Dinapadu S, Reddy MP, Rao MR. Comparative Analysis of Efficacy and Cleaning Ability of Hand and Rotary Devices for Gutta-Percha Removal in Root Canal Retreatment: An in vitro Study. J Contemp Dent Pract 2013; 14 (4):635-643.

DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10024-1377

Published Online: 01-08-2013

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2013; Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) Ltd.


Abstract

Aim of the study

To evaluate the efficacy and cleaning ability of Hedstrom files, and ProTaper retreatment instruments in removing gutta-percha from root canals with and without xylene as solvent.

Materials and methods

Sixty extracted single rooted human teeth were selected and decoronated, straight access established working length determined 1 mm short of canal, chemomechanical preparation done and obturated with guttapercha and AH plus sealer. Samples were stored for 1 week in humidifier divided into four groups of 15 teeth each.

• Group I

Hedstrom files without xylene.

• Group II

Hedstrom files with xylene.

• Group III

ProTaper retreatment instruments without xylene.

• Group IV

ProTaper retreatment instruments with xylene. and the following criteria were assessed

– Time taken for initial plunge of instrument into guttapercha.

– Time taken for complete removal of gutta-percha to reach working length

– Ability of H files and ProTaper retreatment files with/ without xylene to remove gutta-percha in coronal, middle and apical 1/3 of canal.

The teeth were grooved in labiolingual cross section, observed under a steromicroscope and scored according to gutta-percha debris left in the canal. Results were evaluated using ANOVA test and multiple comparisons done using Scheffe test.

Results

The least time to reach working length was found with group IV followed by groups III, II and group I respectively. Also the fastest way to remove maximum gutta-percha was group IV followed by groups III, II, and I respectively with a statistically significant difference among all groups. Apical 1/3 has more amount of remaining gutta-percha debris than middle and coronal 1/3 in all groups. The amount of gutta-percha debris in apical 1/3 was least in group IV followed by groups III, II and I respectively.

Discussion

The better performance of ProTaper rotary instruments has been attributed to their special flute design which tends to pull gutta-percha coronally directing it toward orifice. Also the movements of engine driven instruments produce frictional heat which plasticises gutta-percha and aids in easy removal. Apical third of root canals showed more gutta percha debris compared to coronal and middle 1/3 and has been attributed to the greater anatomic variability and difficulty of instrumentation in the apical area. The existence of deep groves and depressions on dentine walls in this apical 1/3 make them less instrumented areas as it did be difficult to direct the file against the extreme root canal wall.

Conclusion

The fastest technique to remove gutta-percha and the shortest time to reach working length was observed with ProTaper retreatment instruments with xylene followed by ProTaper retreatment files without xylene and Hedstrom files without xylene. After instrumentation for removal of gutta-percha, apical third was found to have more debris compared to coronal and middle 1/3 of the root canal.

How to cite this article

Reddy N, Admala SR, Dinapadu S, Pasari S, Reddy PM, Rao MSR. Comparative Analysis of Efficacy and Cleaning Ability of Hand and Rotary Devices for gutta-percha Removal in Root Canal Retreatment: An in vitro Study. J Contemp Dent Pract 2013;14(4):635-643.


PDF Share
  1. A statistical analysis of surgical and nonsurgical endodontic retreatment cases. Journal of Endodontics 1989;15(6):261-266.
  2. Endodontic retreatment case selection and technique part-2: treatment planning for retreatment. Journal of Endodontics 1988;14:607-614.
  3. gutta-percha retreatment: effectiveness of nickel-titanium rotary instruments versus stainless steel hand files. Journal of Endodontics 2002;28:454-456.
  4. The effectiveness of manual and mechanical instrumentation for the retreatment of three different root canal filling materials. Journal of Endodontics 2008;34(4):468-469.
  5. Efficacy, cleaning ability and safety of different devices for gutta-percha removal in root canal retreatment. International Endodontic Journal 1997;30:227-233.
  6. Comparative study of removal of current endodontic fillings. Journal of Endodontics 2008;34:326-329.
  7. Comparision of relative efficacies of four and rotary instrumentation techniques during endodontic retreatment. International Endodontic Journal 2000;33:361-366.
  8. Ex vivo study of the efficacy of H-files and rotary NiTi instruments to remove guttapercha and four types of sealer. International Endodontic Journal 2006;39:48-54.
  9. Efficacy of two rotary NiTi instrumentation in the removal of gutta-percha during root canal retreatment. Journal of Endodontics 2007;33(1):38-41.
  10. Retreatment efficacy of hand versus automated instrumentation in oval-shaped root canals: an ex vivo study. International Endodontic Journal 2006;39:521-526.
  11. F, Jacinto R, Bueno CE. In vitro evaluation of cleansing working time and analysis of the amount of gutta-percha or resilon remnants in root canal walls after instrumentation for endodontic retreatment. Journal of Endodontics 2007;33(12)1426-1428.
  12. Quantec SC rotary instruments versus hand files for gutta-percha removal in root canal retreatment. International Endodontic Journal 2001;34:514-519.
  13. Thermafil retreatment using a new system B technique or solvent. Journal of Endodontics 1999;25:761-764.
  14. Efficacy of three rotary NiTi instruments in removing gutta-percha from root canals. International Endodontic Journal 2008;41:191-196.
  15. Efficacy, cleaning abilty and safety of different rotary NiTi instruments in root canal retreatment. International Endodontic Journal 2004;37:468-476.
  16. Efficacy of ProTaper universal retreatment files in removing filling materials during root canal retreatment. Journal of Endodontics 2008;34(11):1381-1384.
  17. A Comparison of efficacy of conventional and new retreatment instruments to remove gutta-percha in curved root canals: an ex vivo study. International Journal of Endodontics 2009;42:334-350.
  18. An in vitro analysis of gutta-percha removal using three different techniques. Endodontology 2002;14:41-45.
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.