Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Comparative Study
. 2004 Jul;37(7):468-76.
doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2591.2004.00823.x.

Efficacy, cleaning ability and safety of different rotary NiTi instruments in root canal retreatment

Affiliations
Comparative Study

Efficacy, cleaning ability and safety of different rotary NiTi instruments in root canal retreatment

M Hülsmann et al. Int Endod J. 2004 Jul.

Abstract

Aim: To evaluate the efficacy, cleaning ability and safety of three different rotary nickel-titanium instruments with and without a solvent (eucalyptol) versus hand files in the removal of gutta-percha root fillings.

Methodology: Eighty extracted single-rooted anterior teeth were enlarged to size 35 and obturated with laterally condensed gutta-percha using AHPlus as the sealer. Removal of gutta-percha was performed with the following devices and techniques: FlexMaster, GT Rotary, ProTaper and Hedström files. All techniques were used with and without the solvent eucalyptol. The following data were recorded: time taken to reach the calculated working length and time required for the removal of gutta-percha. The teeth were split longitudinally and photographed. Cleanliness of the root canal walls was scored using the projected slides with a total magnification of approximately 70x. Statistical analysis was performed using the two-way anova (P < 0.001) for the analysis of working time.

Results: The technique that reached the working length most rapidly was that using ProTaper instruments and eucalyptol (+E), followed by FlexMaster + E, ProTaper, FlexMaster, Hedström files + E, GT Rotary + E, Hedström files, and GT Rotary. No significant differences were found for retreatment with or without a solvent in all groups. ProTaper and FlexMaster worked significantly more rapidly than Hedström files and GT Rotary (anova, P < 0.001). Time for complete removal of gutta-percha was again shortest with ProTaper + E, followed by FlexMaster + E, ProTaper, FlexMaster, GT Rotary + E, Hedström files + E, Hedström files, and GT Rotary. ProTaper and FlexMaster again worked significantly faster than the other techniques (anova, P < 0.001). There was no visible filling material extruded apically. Root canal cleanliness proved best following the use of FlexMaster + E, and Hedström files + E, followed by ProTaper + E, and GT Rotary + E.

Conclusion: Under the experimental conditions, FlexMaster and ProTaper NiTi instruments proved to be efficient and time-saving devices for the removal of gutta-percha. The use of eucalyptol as a solvent shortened the time to reach the working length and to remove the gutta-percha, but this was not significant.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

Cited by

LinkOut - more resources