Keywords :
Bonded and nonbonded obturation, Nickel–titanium files, Retreatment
Citation Information :
Sinha N, Kamboj A, Yadav S, Chopra SS, Angrish P, Sharma A, Diwan M. Retreatability of Bonded and Nonbonded Root Canals Obturation Materials Using D-RaCe Retreatment Files. World J Dent 2023; 14 (11):991-998.
Aim: To assess the efficacy and effectiveness of removing Activ gutta-percha (GP), RealSeal Resilon, and GuttaFlow 2 obturation materials from root canals using a new nickel–titanium (NiTi) retreatment system (D-RaCe).
Materials and methods: Root canal cleaning and shaping were done in 60 single-rooted extracted premolars till apical size 30 with 6% taper. Prepared teeth were randomly divided to be obturated with either Activ GP which is glass-ionomer-based system (n = 20), RealSeal Resilon system (n = 20), or GuttaFlow 2 the polyvinylsiloxane-based system (n = 20). The obturated root canals were then removed with D-RaCe NiTi retreatment system. Residual filling assessment in all the canal thirds, that is, coronal, middle, and apical was done by taking digital radiographs of prepared teeth in buccolingual and proximal axes. The residual percentage of filling material in each canal third and total canal area was calculated. Data collected was analyzed statistically with one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) followed by Tukey's post hoc and student t-test for multiple comparisons.
Results: It was observed that whatsoever the sealer type used, complete filling removal was not achieved from the root canals. Significant findings regarding remaining filling material were found in the apical third (p < 0.05) compared to coronal and middle third. When comparing the sealers, GuttaFlow 2 had the highest mean percentage of remaining material when compared to both Activ GP and Resilon groups. Retreatment time for Activ GP was more when compared to Resilon and GuttaFlow 2 and the difference was statistically significant (p < 0.01).
Conclusion: Within the limitations of the study assessment of residual material was done by gross radiographic criteria, and it was found that Activ GP and RealSeal Resilon were more effectively removed from root canals than GuttaFlow 2 although it took more time for the removal of Activ GP.
Clinical significance: D-RaCe retreatment system was found to be a safe and effective system in negotiating and removal of root canal the filling material and simultaneously reaching the working length of root canals. However, complete removal was not achieved for both bonded and nonbonded obturation materials.
Imura N, Zuolo ML, Ferreira MO, et al. Effectiveness of the canal finder and hand instrumentation in removal of gutta-percha root fillings during root canal retreatment. Int Endod J 1996;29(6):382–386. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2591.1996.tb01402.x
Kosti E, Lambrianidis T, Economides N, et al. Ex vivo study of the efficacy of H-files and rotary Ni-Ti instruments to remove gutta-percha and four types of sealer. Int Endod J 2006;39(1):48–54. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2591.2005.01046.x
Boykin MJ, Gilbert GH, Tilashalski KR, et al. Incidence of endodontic treatment: a 48-month prospective study. J Endod 2003;29(12):806–809. DOI: 10.1097/00004770-200312000-00005
Friedman S, Moshonov J, Trope M. Residue of gutta-percha and a glass ionomer cement sealer following root canal retreatment. Int Endod J 1993;26(3):169–172. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2591.1993.tb00788.x
Belli S, Ozcan E, Derinbay O, et al. A comparative evaluation of sealing ability of a new, self-etching, dual-curable sealer: hybrid root SEAL (MetaSEAL). Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 2008;106(6):e45–e52. DOI: 10.1016/j.tripleo.2008.07.027
Hauman CH, Love RM. Biocompatibility of dental materials used in contemporary endodontic therapy: a review. Part 2. Root-canal-filling materials. Int Endod J 2003;36(3):147–160. DOI: 10.1046/j.1365-2591.2003.00637.x
Koch K, Brave D. Bioceramic Technology: A Game Changer in Endodontics, Endodontic Practice US 2009;2.17–21
Só MV, Saran C, Magro ML, et al. Efficacy of ProTaper retreatment system in root canals filled with gutta-percha and two endodontic sealers. J Endod 2008;34(10):1223–1225. DOI: 10.1016/j.joen.2008.07.020
Bramante CM, Fidelis NS, Assumpção 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
Roggendorf MJ, Legner M, Ebert J, et al. Micro-CT evaluation of residual material in canals filled with Activ GP or GuttaFlow following removal with NiTi instruments. Int Endod J 2010;43(3):200–209. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2591.2009.01659.x
Saad AY, Al-Hadlaq SM, Al-Katheeri NH. Efficacy of two rotary NiTi instruments in the removal of Gutta-Percha during root canal retreatment. J Endod 2007;33(1):38–41. DOI: 10.1016/j.joen.2006.08.012
Tay FR, Pashley DH. Monoblocks in root canals: a hypothetical or a tangible goal. J Endod 2007;33(4):391–398. DOI: 10.1016/j.joen.2006.10.009
Imura N, Kato AS, Hata GI, et al. A comparison of the relative efficacies of four hand and rotary instrumentation techniques during endodontic retreatment. Int Endod J 2000;33(4):361–366. DOI: 10.1046/j.1365-2591.2000.00320.x
Hülsmann M, Stotz S. Efficacy, cleaning ability and safety of different devices for gutta-percha removal in root canal retreatment. Int Endod J 1997;30(4):227–233. DOI: 10.1046/j.1365-2591.1997.00036.x
Bramante CM, Betti LV. Efficacy of Quantec rotary instruments for gutta-percha removal. Int Endod J 2000;33(5):463–467. DOI: 10.1046/j.1365-2591.2000.00340.x
Schirrmeister JF, Strohl C, Altenburger MJ, et al. Shaping ability and safety of five different rotary nickel-titanium instruments compared with stainless steel hand instrumentation in simulated curved root canals. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 2006;101(6):807–813. DOI: 10.1016/j.tripleo.2005.06.014
Takahashi CM, Cunha RS, de Martin AS, et al. In vitro evaluation of the effectiveness of ProTaper Universal rotary retreatment system for gutta-percha removal with or without a solvent. J Endod 2009;35(11):1580–1583. DOI: 10.1016/j.joen.2009.07.015
Zanettini PR, Barletta FB, de Mello Rahde N. In vitro comparison of different reciprocating systems used during endodontic retreatment. Aust Endod J 2008;34(3):80–85. DOI: 10.1111/j.1747-4477.2007.00060.x
Tasdemir T, Er K, Yildirim T, et al. Efficacy of three rotary NiTi instruments in removing gutta-percha from root canals. Int Endod J 2008;41(3):191–196. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2591.2007.01335.x
Wilcox LR. Endodontic retreatment: ultrasonics and chloroform as the final step in reinstrumentation. J Endod 1989;15(3):125–128. DOI: 10.1016/S0099-2399(89)80133-5
de Oliveira DP, Barbizam JV, Trope M, et al. Comparison between gutta-percha and resilon removal using two different techniques in endodontic retreatment. J Endod 2006;32(4):362–364. DOI: 10.1016/j.joen.2005.12.006
Ferreira JJ, Rhodes JS, Ford TR. The efficacy of gutta-percha removal using ProFiles. Int Endod J 2001;34(4):267–274. DOI: 10.1046/j.1365-2591.2001.00379.x
Masiero AV, Barletta FB. Effectiveness of different techniques for removing gutta-percha during retreatment. Int Endod J 2005;38(1):2–7. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2591.2004.00878.x
Gu LS, Ling JQ, Wei X, et al. Efficacy of ProTaper Universal rotary retreatment system for gutta-percha removal from root canals. Int Endod J 2008;41(4):288–295. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2591.2007.01350.x
Marques da Silva B, Baratto-Filho F, Leonardi DP, et al. Effectiveness of ProTaper, D-RaCe, and Mtwo retreatment files with and without supplementary instruments in the removal of root canal filling material. Int Endod J 2012;45(10):927–932. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2591.2012.02051.x
Schirrmeister JF, Meyer KM, Hermanns P, et al. Effectiveness of hand and rotary instrumentation for removing a new synthetic polymer-based root canal obturation material (Epiphany) during retreatment. Int Endod J 2006;39(2):150–156. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2591.2006.01066.x
Ersev H, Yilmaz B, Dinçol ME, et al. The efficacy of ProTaper Universal rotary retreatment instrumentation to remove single gutta-percha cones cemented with several endodontic sealers. Int Endod J 2012;46(8):756–762. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2591.2012.02032.x
Hammad M, Qualtrough A, Silikas N. Three-dimensional evaluation of effectiveness of hand and rotary instrumentation for retreatment of canals filled with different materials. J Endod 2008;34(11):1370–1373. DOI: 10.1016/j.joen.2008.07.024
Barletta FB, Rahde Nde M, Limongi O, et al. In vitro comparative analysis of 2 mechanical techniques for removing gutta-percha during retreatment. J Can Dent Assoc 2007;73(1):65. PMID: 17295947.
Wilcox LR, Krell KV, Madison S, et al. Endodontic retreatment: evaluation of gutta-percha and sealer removal and canal reinstrumentation. J Endod 1987;13(9):453–457. DOI: 10.1016/S0099-2399(87)80064-X
Koch K, Brave D (2006) Integral gutta-percha core/cone obturation technique. United States Patent 7,021,936.
Marfisi K, Mercade M, Plotino G, et al. Efficacy of three different rotary files to remove gutta-percha and Resilon from root canals. Int Endod J 2010;43(11):1022–1028. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2591.2010.01758.x