The Journal of Contemporary Dental Practice

Register      Login



Volume / Issue

Online First

Related articles

VOLUME 21 , ISSUE 3 ( March, 2020 ) > List of Articles


Assessment of Apical Extrusion using Rotary and Reciprocating Systems during Root Canal Retreatment

Caroline Solda, Karine Padoim, Lilian Rigo, Yara Teresinha Corrêa Silva Sousa, Mateus Silveira Martins Hartmann

Keywords : Apical extrusion, Reciprocating system, Rotary system, Root canal retreatment

Citation Information : Solda C, Padoim K, Rigo L, Sousa YT, Hartmann MS. Assessment of Apical Extrusion using Rotary and Reciprocating Systems during Root Canal Retreatment. J Contemp Dent Pract 2020; 21 (3):238-241.

DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10024-2775

License: CC BY-NC 4.0

Published Online: 01-12-2018

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2020; The Author(s).


Aim: The objective of this study was to assess apical extrusion after filling material removal using two systems, one rotary and one reciprocating. Materials and methods: A total of 34 extracted mandibular premolars with single roots were selected and, posteriorly, prepared and filled. Following material aging for 60 days, teeth were divided into two groups, according to the method used to remove root filling material: group I, ProTaper® Universal Retreatment instruments plus refining with the Hero 642® sequence and group II, WaveOne® instruments. The teeth were fixed in an apparatus designed to collect the extruded material during removal procedure. Data on the amount of debris extruded (mg/weight) were analyzed using the Student's t test with a significance level of 5%. Results: No significant differences were found between the groups with regard to the amount of material extruded during root canal retreatment. Conclusion: The present findings suggest that the extrusion of debris during apical root canal retreatment does not depend on the instrument design or the protocol employed. Clinical significance: Regardless of root canal clearance techniques, debris extrusion eventually occurs during endodontic retreatment and may be related to postoperative pain.

  1. Tabassum S, Khan FR. Failure of endodontic treatment: the usual suspects. Eur J Dent 2016;10(1):144–147. DOI: 10.4103/1305-7456.175682.
  2. Ozyurek T, Demiryurek EO. Efficacy of different nickel-titanium instruments in removing gutta-percha during root canal retreatment. J Endod 2016;42(4):646–649. DOI: 10.1016/j.joen.2016.01.007.
  3. Zuolo AS, Mello JE, Jr, Cunha RS, et al. Efficacy of reciprocating and rotary techniques for removing filling material during root canal retreatment. Int Endod J 2013;46(10):947–953. DOI: 10.1111/iej.12085.
  4. Chandrasekar, Ebenezar AV, Kumar M, et al. A comparative evaluation of gutta percha removal and extrusion of apical debris by rotary and hand files. J Clin Diagn Res 2014;8(11):ZC110–ZC114. DOI: 10.7860/JCDR/2014/10203.5199.
  5. Dall'Agnol C, Hartmann MS, Barletta FB. Computed tomography assessment of the efficiency of different techniques for removal of root canal filling material. Braz Dent J 2008;19(4):306–312. DOI: 10.1590/S0103-64402008000400004.
  6. 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.
  7. Bramante CM, Fidelis NS, Assumpcao TS, et al. Heat release, time required, and cleaning ability of MTwo R and ProTaper universal retreatment systems in the removal of filling material. J Endod 2010;36(11):1870–1873. DOI: 10.1016/j.joen.2010.08.013.
  8. Silva EJ, Orlowsky NB, Herrera DR, et al. Effectiveness of rotatory and reciprocating movements in root canal filling material removal. Braz Oral Res 2015;29:1–6. DOI: 10.1590/1807-3107BOR-2015.vol29.0056.
  9. Capar ID, Arslan H, Ertas H, et al. Effectiveness of ProTaper universal retreatment instruments used with rotary or reciprocating adaptive motion in the removal of root canal filling material. Int Endod J 2015;48(1):79–83. DOI: 10.1111/iej.12279.
  10. Crozeta BM, Silva-Sousa YT, Leoni GB, et al. Micro-computed tomography study of filling material removal from oval-shaped canals by using rotary, reciprocating, and adaptive motion systems. J Endod 2016;42(5):793–797. DOI: 10.1016/j.joen.2016.02.005.
  11. Akbulut MB, Akman M, Terlemez A, et al. Efficacy of twisted file Adaptive, Reciproc and ProTaper universal Retreatment instruments for root-canal-filling removal: a cone-beam computed tomography study. Dent Mater J 2016;35(1):126–131. DOI: 10.4012/dmj.2015-214.
  12. Plotino G, Grande NM, Testarelli L, et al. Cyclic fatigue of Reciproc and WaveOne reciprocating instruments. Int Endod J 2012;45(7):614–618. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2591.2012.02015.x.
  13. Fruchi Lde C, Ordinola-Zapata R, Cavenago BC, et al. Efficacy of reciprocating instruments for removing filling material in curved canals obturated with a single-cone technique: a micro-computed tomographic analysis. J Endod 2014;40(7):1000–1004. DOI: 10.1016/j.joen.2013.12.011.
  14. Silva EJ, Sa L, Belladonna FG, et al. Reciprocating versus rotary systems for root filling removal: assessment of the apically extruded material. J Endod 2014;40(12):2077–2080. DOI: 10.1016/j.joen.2014.09.009.
  15. Borges AH, Pereira TM, Porto AN, et al. The influence of cervical preflaring on the amount of apically extruded debris after root canal preparation using different instrumentation systems. J Endod 2016;42(3):465–469. DOI: 10.1016/j.joen.2015.10.010.
  16. Bürklein S, Schäfer E. Apically extruded debris with reciprocating single-file and full-sequence rotary instrumentation systems. J Endod 2012;38(6):850–852. DOI: 10.1016/j.joen.2012.02.017.
  17. Tasdemir T, Er K, Çelik D, et al. An in vitro comparison of apically extruded debris using three rotary nickel-titanium instruments. J Dent Sci 2010;5(3):121–125. DOI: 10.1016/S1991-7902(10)60017-7.
  18. Delvarani A, Mohammadzadeh Akhlaghi N, Aminirad R, et al. In vitro comparison of apical debris extrusion using rotary and reciprocating systems in severely curved root canals. Iran Endod J 2017;12(1):34–37. DOI: 10.22037/iej.2017.07.
  19. Yilmaz K, Ozyurek T. Apically extruded debris after retreatment procedure with Reciproc, ProTaper next, and Twisted file adaptive instruments. J Endod 2017;43(4):648–651. DOI: 10.1016/j.joen.2016.12.003.
  20. Delai D, Boijink D, Hoppe CB, et al. Apically extruded debris in filling removal of curved canals using 3 NiTi systems and hand files. Braz Dent J 2018;29(1):54–59. DOI: 10.1590/0103-6440201801760.
  21. Myers GL, Montgomery S. A comparison of weights of debris extruded apically by conventional filing and canal master techniques. J Endod 1991;17(6):275–279. DOI: 10.1016/S0099-2399(06)81866-2.
  22. Silva EJ, Carapia MF, Lopes RM, et al. Comparison of apically extruded debris after large apical preparations by full-sequence rotary and single-file reciprocating systems. Int Endod J 2016;49(7):700–705. DOI: 10.1111/iej.12503.
  23. Pawar AM, Pawar M, Metzger Z, et al. Apical extrusion of debris by supplementary files used for retreatment: an ex vivo comparative study. J Conserv Dent 2016;19(2):125–129. DOI: 10.4103/0972-0707.178686.
  24. Liu ZX, Liu Y, Ww Chang J, et al. Morphological analysis of apical foramen over-instrumented by three rotary NiTi systems. Chin J Dent Res 2014;17(2):111–116.
  25. Huang X, Ling J, Wei X, et al. Quantitative evaluation of debris extruded apically by using ProTaper universal tulsa rotary system in endodontic retreatment. J Endod 2007;33(9):1102–1105. DOI: 10.1016/j.joen.2007.05.019.
  26. Altundasar E, Nagas E, Uyanik O, et al. Debris and irrigant extrusion potential of 2 rotary systems and irrigation needles. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 2011;112(4):e31–e35. DOI: 10.1016/j.tripleo.2011.03.044.
  27. Hachmeister DR, Schindler WG, Walker WA,3rd, et al. The sealing ability and retention characteristics of mineral trioxide aggregate in a model of apexification. J Endod 2002;28(5):386–390. DOI: 10.1097/00004770-200205000-00010.
PDF Share
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.