A STUDY COMPARING THE ABILITY TO REMOVE FOUR DIFFERENT ENDODONTIC ROOT CANAL FILLING MATERIALS USING ROTARY INSTRUMENTS USED IN CURRENT PRACTISE.

Abstract

The aim of the present study was to assess the ability to remove four different root canal
fillings performed by using current methods during re-treatment with rotary instruments.
Seventy-two freshly extracted human anterior teeth with single straight root canals were
instrumented with Mtwo rotary files. The teeth were randomly divided into 4 obturation
groups of 18 specimens each as follows: group 1, Resilon and Epiphany; group 2, GuttaFlow
obturation system; group 3, EndoTwinn obturation system; group 4, gutta-percha with AH
Plus sealer. The filled canals were re-treated by using Mtwo-Retreatment instruments and
Mtwo instruments. The time required to remove the obturation material was recorded. After
splitting the roots, the amount of residual filling material on the canal walls was imaged and
measured with image analyzer software. Statisticalanalysis was accomplished by KruskalWallis and MannWhitney U tests for the analysis of root canal cleanliness. There was no
statistically significant difference among the 4 filling techniques regarding the amount of
residual material in the apical, middle, and coronal thirds and inside the whole canal area (P
.05). Regarding the mean time of re-treatment, the fillings performed by using GuttaFlow and
EndoTwinn methods were removed much more quickly compared with the other 2 methods
(P .001). It was observed that the fillings performed with the above canal filling methods
were removed in a similar fashion with rotary instruments during re-treatment