Efficacy of reciprocating systems for removing root filling material plus complementary cleaning methods in flattened canals: Microtomography and scanning electron microscopy study

• Published in: Microscopy research and technique Vol. 82; no. 7; pp. 1057 - 1064
• Main Authors: Borges, Mariana M. B., Duque, Jussaro A., Zancan, Rafaela F., Vivan, Rodrigo R., Bernardes, Ricardo A., Duarte, Marco A. H.
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Hoboken, USA John Wiley & Sons, Inc 01.07.2019; Wiley Subscription Services, Inc
• Subjects: Canals; Canals (anatomy); Cleaning; Cleaning systems; Computed tomography; Dental roots; Fluoridation; Gold; Incisors; Instrumentation; Mandible; Microtomography; micro‐CT; Reciproc Blue; retreatment; scanning electron microscope; Scanning electron microscopy; Statistical methods; Statistics; System effectiveness; Systems analysis; Teeth; XP‐endo Shaper; Reciproc Blue; XP-endo Shaper; scanning electron microscope; micro-CT; retreatment
• ISSN: 1059-910X; 1097-0029
• DOI: 10.1002/jemt.23253

The aim of this study was to evaluate three reciprocating systems and complementary cleaning methods on filling material removal during retreatment of flattened canals. Thirty‐six mandibular incisors were prepared using rotary instruments up to size 25.08 and filled using the single‐cone technique. Subsequently, the teeth were divided into three groups (n = 12) according to retreatment procedures: Reciproc Blue (RB): 25/0.08 and 40/0.06; ProDesign R (PDR): 25/0.06 and 35/0.05; and WaveOne Gold (WOG): 25/0.07 and 35/0.06. The remaining filling volume materials were assessed by means of micro‐CT imaging before and after retreatment. After this, the specimens were subdivided into three groups according to complementary cleaning methods: XP‐Endo Shaper (30/0.01); passive ultrasonic irrigation (PUI); 60° oscillatory instrumentation with #30 H‐file, and micro‐CT scan was taken. Then, the roots were cut in half and the samples were analyzed by scanning electron microscope (SEM). The data were analyzed statistically using Kruskal–Wallis and Dunn's Multiple Comparison test with significance level of 5%. None of the reciprocating files promoted complete removal of filling material and there was no statistical difference between the groups, regardless instrument size (p > 0.05). Complementary cleaning methods increased remnant filling removal (p < 0.05). XP‐endo Shaper significantly reduced the amount of filling material in the apical and middle thirds, compared with H‐files (p < 0.05), with no difference with PUI. In the SEM, there was no statistical difference among the instruments (p > 0.05). The reciprocating systems showed similar effectiveness in removing root filling material. Complementary cleaning method with the XP‐Shaper enhanced filling material removal. Reciprocating systems, such as Reciproc Blue, WaveOne Gold, and ProDesign R showed similar effectiveness in removing root filling material from flattened canals and complementary cleaning methods tested enhanced the removal of residues of filling materials. XP‐endo Shaper, used in the endodontic retreatment reduced the amount of filling material in apical and middle thirds when compared with oscillatory H‐files.