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
. 2014 Apr;40(4):543-6.
doi: 10.1016/j.joen.2013.11.013. Epub 2013 Dec 31.

Efficacy of 2 reciprocating systems compared with a rotary retreatment system for gutta-percha removal

Affiliations
Comparative Study

Efficacy of 2 reciprocating systems compared with a rotary retreatment system for gutta-percha removal

Marcos de Azevêdo Rios et al. J Endod. 2014 Apr.

Abstract

Introduction: The maximum removal of root canal filling material is essential for successful endodontic retreatment. The purpose of this study was to assess the efficacy of 2 reciprocating systems (Reciproc [VDW, Munich, Germany] and WaveOne [Dentsply Maillefer, Ballaigues, Switzerland]) compared with a nickel-titanium (NiTi) rotary system (ProTaper Universal Retreatment [Dentsply Maillefer]) in the removal of root canal filling material.

Methods: Sixty root canals of extracted human maxillary incisors were prepared using the NiTi ProTaper rotary system with the complementary use of a #40 K-type file and then obturated. The specimens were divided into 3 groups (n = 20) according to the system used for filling removal: group 1: instrument R25 of the Reciproc system, group 2: primary instrument of the WaveOne system, and group 3: NiTi rotary instruments of the ProTaper Universal Retreatment system. The teeth were cleaved longitudinally and photographed under a dental operating microscope with 5 × magnification. Images were transferred to a computer, and residual filling material was quantified using Image Tool software (University of Texas Health Science Center, San Antonio, TX). Results were compared using 1-way analysis of variance (P < .05).

Results: All teeth examined had filling remnants within the canal. No statistically significant difference (P > .05) in residual filling material was observed among the groups, with 4.30% in group 1, 2.98% in group 2, and 3.14% in group 3.

Conclusions: The Reciproc and WaveOne reciprocating systems were as effective as the ProTaper Universal retreatment system for gutta-percha and sealer removal.

Keywords: Gutta-percha; nickel-titanium files; reciprocating motion; root canal retreatment.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

Cited by

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources