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
. 2024 Jun 11;16(6):e62128.
doi: 10.7759/cureus.62128. eCollection 2024 Jun.

Comparative Evaluation of the Removal of Gutta Percha From the Root Canal Using Various Retreatment File Systems With and Without Magnification: An In Vitro Study

Nishitha Arun  1 , Pradeep Solete  1 , Ganesh Jeevanandan  2 , Delphine P Antony  1 , Sruthi Sairaman  1 , Swathi S  1
Affiliations

Comparative Evaluation of the Removal of Gutta Percha From the Root Canal Using Various Retreatment File Systems With and Without Magnification: An In Vitro Study

Nishitha Arun et al. Cureus. .

Abstract

Aim and objective: The main goal was to compare the efficacy of gutta percha (GP) removal from the root canal using the Neo Endo Retreatment file system, Solite RS3, and ProTaper Universal Retreatment (PTUR) files with and without magnification under a direct operative microscope using stereomicroscopic evaluation.

Materials and methods: Sixty single-rooted teeth were randomly assigned to one of three groups after obturation till F2 mastercone with resin sealer: Group 1 (n=20): Neo Endo Retreatment Files, Group 2 (n=20): Solite RS3, Group 3 (n=20): PTUR files. Each group was further separated into two subgroups: Subgroup 1: without magnification (no direct operative microscope) and Subgroup 2: with magnification under a direct operative microscope at 12× magnification. After retreatment, the roots were grooved buccolingually and split into two halves using a diamond disc with the help of a chisel. The samples were examined under a stereomicroscope. Images were captured in a digital camera and analyzed using image analyzing software Image Pro v10 (Media Cybernetics).

Results: The Neo Endo retreatment file system had a significantly greater percentage of remaining obturating material than the Solite RS3 Retreatment and PTUR file systems (p<0.05) in both groups with and without magnification. In the group without magnification, Solite RS3 showed a significant difference compared to ProTaper (p<0.05). In the group with magnification, there was no significant difference between the ProTaper Universal retreatment file system and Solite RS3 (p=0.589). Retreatment performed without magnification had more remnant GP when compared to the retreatment procedure performed under magnification of the direct operative microscope.

Conclusion: Under stereomicroscopic evaluation, the remnant GP was higher in the Neo Endo File System both with and without magnification than in the Solite Retreatment and PTUR file systems. ProTaper showed moderate significance in removing the obturation than Solite RS3 in the magnification group. The Solite RS3 file system performed as efficiently as the PTUR file system.

Keywords: gutta percha; neo endo; protaper; remnants; retreatment; solite rs3.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Human subjects: Consent was obtained or waived by all participants in this study. Scientific Review Board of Saveetha Dental College and Hospitals issued approval SRB/SDC/ENDO-2004/23/107. Only the extracted teeth have been used in this study with patient consent. Animal subjects: All authors have confirmed that this study did not involve animal subjects or tissue. Conflicts of interest: In compliance with the ICMJE uniform disclosure form, all authors declare the following: Payment/services info: All authors have declared that no financial support was received from any organization for the submitted work. Financial relationships: All authors have declared that they have no financial relationships at present or within the previous three years with any organizations that might have an interest in the submitted work. Other relationships: All authors have declared that there are no other relationships or activities that could appear to have influenced the submitted work.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1. Remnant gutta percha viewed under stereomicroscope without magnification
(a) Neo Endo file system; (b) Solite RS 3 Retreatment file system; (c) ProTaper Retreatment system.
Figure 2
Figure 2. Remnant gutta percha viewed under stereomicroscope under magnification (direct operative microscope at 12× magnification)
(a) Neo Endo file system; (b) Solite RS3 Retreatment file system; (c) ProTaper Retreatment system.
Figure 3
Figure 3. Remnant GP present was significantly higher in root canal without magnification when compared to that with magnification under direct operative microscope at 12× magnification (p<0.05)
GP, gutta percha.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Characterization of successful root canal treatment. Estrela C, Holland R, Estrela CR, Alencar AH, Sousa-Neto MD, Pécora JD. Braz Dent J. 2014;25:3–11. - PubMed
    1. Factors that affect the outcomes of root canal treatment and retreatment-A reframing of the principles. Gulabivala K, Ng YL. Int Endod J. 2023;56 Suppl 2:82–115. - PubMed
    1. Contemporary cleaning and shaping of the root canal system. Tomson PL, Simon SR. Prim Dent J. 2016;5:46–53. - PubMed
    1. Endodontic treatment outcomes in a large patient population in the USA: An epidemiological study. Salehrabi R, Rotstein I. J Endod. 2004;30:846–850. - PubMed
    1. Conventional endodontic failure and retreatment. Wong R. Dent Clin North Am. 2004;48:265–289. - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources