Comparison between Single-file Rotary Systems: Part 1—Efficiency, Effectiveness, and Adverse Effects in Endodontic Retreatment

• Published in: Journal of endodontics Vol. 44; no. 11; pp. 1720 - 1724
• Main Authors: Azim, Adham A., Wang, Howard H., Tarrosh, Mohamed, Azim, Katharina A., Piasecki, Lucila
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: United States Elsevier Inc 01.11.2018
• Subjects: Cone-Beam Computed Tomography; Debridement - instrumentation; debris extrusion; Dental Instruments; Dental Pulp Cavity - diagnostic imaging; Dentistry; endodontic retreatment; Equipment Design; Gutta-Percha; Humans; Hyflex EDM; In Vitro Techniques; Incisor; Mandible; Operative Time; Retreatment - instrumentation; Root Canal Filling Materials; Root Canal Preparation - instrumentation; single-file system; Time Factors; WaveOne Gold; XP Shaper; single-file system; debris extrusion; Hyflex EDM; endodontic retreatment; WaveOne Gold; Cone-beam computed tomography; XP Shaper
• ISSN: 0099-2399; 1878-3554
• DOI: 10.1016/j.joen.2018.07.022

The aim of this study was to evaluate in vitro the performance of 3 single-file systems: WaveOne Gold Primary (WOG; Dentsply Sirona, Ballaigues, Switzerland), Hyflex EDM “one file” (EDM; Coltene/Whaledent, Alstatten, Switzerland), and XP Shaper (XP; FKG, La Chaux de Fonds, Switzerland), for nonsurgical endodontic retreatment on mandibular anterior teeth in regard to the amount of remaining filling material inside the canal, debris extrusion, and operation time. Sixty extracted standardized mandibular incisors presenting with a single oval canal were prepared to size 30.04 and obturated using warm vertical condensation. After 30 days (37°C, 100% humidity), teeth were randomly divided into 3 groups (n = 20) according to the file used for retreatment (WOG, EDM, or XP operated at 3000 rpm). During the retreatment procedures, preweighed vials were used to collect apically extruded debris, and the time required to remove the filling material was recorded in seconds. Cone-beam computed tomographic scans were taken before and after the retreatment to determine the amount of remaining filling material inside the root canal space. Statistical analysis was performed using the Kruskal-Wallis test, 1-way analysis of variance, and the Pearson test at a 5% significance level. There was a statistically significant difference among the groups regarding the instrumentation time (P < .05). XP was the fastest to remove gutta-percha from the canals (40.54 ± 28.03 seconds) followed by EDM (55.77 ± 19.76 seconds) and WOG (105.92 ± 53.92 seconds). The percentage of remaining filling was significantly greater for WOG (26.65% ± 14.63%) (P < .05). No difference was found between EDM (13.51% ± 9.53%) and XP (8.60% ± 7.28%). No difference was found regarding the amount of extruded debris among the 3 groups (P > .05). XP was the most efficient in gutta-percha removal from the canals when operated at a higher speed (3000 rpm) followed by EDM and WOG. •In this study, we investigated the effectiveness of 3 different single-file systems for endodontic retreatment in regard to the remaining root canal filling material, the amount of apically extruded debris, and operation time.•Within the limitations of the study, the XP Shaper was the most efficient in gutta-percha removal from the canals followed by Hyflex EDM and WaveOne Gold.•The percentage of remaining filling was significantly greater for WaveOne Gold compared with the other 2 rotary systems.•No difference was found in regard to the amount of extruded debris among the 3 groups.