Efficacy of rotary and reciprocating single-file systems on different access outlines for gutta-percha removal in retreatment: An in vitro study
| Autor: | Saritha Vallabhaneni, Kainath Fatima, Jayaprakash Patil, Sandhya Khasnis, Rohit Nair |
|---|---|
| Jazyk: | angličtina |
| Rok vydání: | 2018 |
| Předmět: |
Contracted endodontic cavity
Post hoc Ethylene diamine Root canal Dentistry 03 medical and health sciences chemistry.chemical_compound Reciprocating motion ProTaper retreatment system 0302 clinical medicine WaveOne system medicine In vitro study General Dentistry Neoniti biology business.industry Significant difference 030206 dentistry Gutta-percha biology.organism_classification medicine.anatomical_structure chemistry Sodium hypochlorite dental operating microscope Original Article business 030217 neurology & neurosurgery Traditional endodontic cavity |
| Zdroj: | Journal of Conservative Dentistry : JCD |
| ISSN: | 0974-5203 0972-0707 |
| Popis: | Introduction: The aim of this study is to compare the effectiveness of reciprocating and continuous rotary nickel-titanium instruments during retreatment performed through two different access outlines. Methodology: A total of 48 freshly extracted mandibular first and second premolars with single root and canal were selected. Initial root canal treatment was completed through a contracted endodontic cavity (CEC) design. Canals were instrumented with F2 ProTaper instrument, obturated with warm lateral condensation of gutta-percha with AH Plus sealer, and allowed to set for 30 days at 37°C and 100% humidity. For retreatment, specimens were divided into two groups (n = 24) on the basis of access outline, CEC or traditional endodontic cavity. Retreatment was initiated using ProTaper Retreatment instruments (D1–D3). Specimens were further divided (n = 12) and reinstrumented up to Neoniti 25/0.08 or WaveOne 25/0.08. Irrigation was performed using 3% sodium hypochlorite and 17% ethylene diamine tetraacetic acid. Retreatment time was recorded. Teeth were sectioned and photographed, and the percentage of remaining obturation material was measured. Results: Data were collected, and statistical analysis was performed using one-way analysis of variance and Tukey honestly significant difference multiple post hoc procedures (P < 0.05). Conclusion: None of the systems completely removed the root filling material from root canals. However, ProTaper/Neoniti instruments removed more GP when compared to Protaper/WaveOne instruments with both the access outlines. Both the instruments with traditional access outline required less time for removal of obturating material when compared to CEC. |
| Databáze: | OpenAIRE |
| Externí odkaz: |
|