Skip Navigation
Skip to contents

Restor Dent Endod : Restorative Dentistry & Endodontics

Search
Advanced Search
OPEN ACCESS
mobile search button mobile menu button

Articles

Page Path
HOME > Restor Dent Endod > Volume 29(3); 2004 > Article
Original Article THE EFFECT OF GUTTA-PERCHA REMOVAL USING NICKEL-TITANIUM ROTARY INSTRUMENTS
Jeong-Hun Jeon, Jeong-Beom Min, Ho-Keel Hwang,*
J Korean Acad Conserv Dent 2004;29(3):-218.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.5395/JKACD.2004.29.3.212
Published online: January 14, 2004

Department of Conservative Dentistry, College of Dentistry, Chosun University

*Corresponding author: Ho-Keel Hwang, Department of Conservative Dentistry, College of Dentistry, Chosun University 421 Susuk-dong, Dong-gu, Gwangju, 501-825, Korea, Tel : 82-62-220-3840 Fax : 82-62-232-9064, E-mail : rootcanal@hanmail.net

Copyright © 2004 The Korean Academy of Conservative Dentistry

This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

  • 118 Views
  • 0 Download
prev next
Full Article

Download PDF Download PDF

  • The purpose of this study was to quantify the amount of remaining gutta-percha/sealer on the walls of root canals when three types of nickel-titanium rotary instruments(Profile, ProTaper and K3) and a hand instrument(Hedstrom file) used to remove these materials.
    The results of this study were as follows:

    1. In the total time for gutta-percha removal, Profile group was the fastest and followed by K3, Protaper, Hedstrom file group.

    2. In case of the evaluation of the volume of remained gutta-percha from radiograph, K3 group got the highest score and followed by Protaper, Hedstrom file, Profile group in the apical 1/3.

    3. In case of the evaluation of the volume of gutta-percha remained from stereomicroscope, K3 group got the highest score and followed by Protaper, Hedstrom file, Profile group in the apical 1/3.

    These results showed that instrumentation using nickel-titanium rotary instrument groups was faster than that using hand instrument group. The effect of gutta-percha removal using Profile group was better than that using Protaper and K3 group in the nickel-titanium rotary instrument groups.
  • Keywords: Endodontic retreatment; Gutta-percha removal; Profile; ProTaper; K3
Figure 1.
Mean time for gutta-percha removal
jkacd-29-212f1.jpg
Figure 2.
The representive image showing score 0
jkacd-29-212f2.jpg
Figure 3.
The representive image showing score 1
jkacd-29-212f3.jpg
Figure 4.
The representive image showing score 2
jkacd-29-212f4.jpg
Figure 5.
The representive image showing score 3
jkacd-29-212f5.jpg
Table 1.
Group classification according to instruments
Group No. Instrument Manufacture
1 10 H-file (chloroform) Maillefer, Swiss
2 10 ProTaper Maillefer, Swiss
3 10 Profile Maillefer, Swiss
4 10 K3 Analytic, USA
Table 2.
Mean time to gutta-percha removal (unit : sec)
Group No. Mean S.D.
1 10 * 86.34
2 10 45.98
3 10 17.75
4 10 13.80

*: Significantly different at p < 0.05 (Tukey HSD test)

Table 3.
Distribution of scores for canal wall cleanlines by radiographic evaluation
Group Scores
0 1 2 3
1 A 3 7 0 0
M 6 3 1 0
C 9 1 0 0
2 A 0 7 1 2
M 4 4 1 1
C 4 3 1 2
3 A 4 6 0 0
M 6 4 0 0
C 9 1 0 0
4 A 1 4 2 3
M 3 7 0 0
C 10 0 0 0

(A : Apical 1/3, M : Middle 1/3, C : Coronal 1/3)

Table 4.
Distribution of scores for canal wall cleanlines by radiographic evaluation
Group Scores
0 1 2 3
1 A 2 8 0 0
M 7 3 0 0
C 8 2 0 0
2 A 0 4 5 1
M 3 6 1 0
C 3 5 0 2
3 A 4 6 0 0
M 7 2 1 0
C 9 1 0 0
4 A 1 2 2 5
M 7 3 0 0
C 10 0 0 0

(A : Apical 1/3, M : Middle 1/3, C : Coronal 1/3)

Table 5.
Statistical analysis of mean scores for canal wall cleanlines in apical thirds by radiographic evaluation

*:Significantly different at p < 0.05 (Mann-Whitney test)

Table 6.
Statistical analysis of mean scores for canal wall cleanlines in coronal thirds by radiographic evaluation

*: Significantly different at p < 0.05 (Mann-Whitney test)

Table 7.
Statistical analysis of mean scores for canal wall cleanlines in apical thirds by stereomicroscopic evaluation

*: Significantly different at p < 0.05 (Mann-Whitney test)

Table 8.
Statistical analysis of mean scores for canal wall cleanlines in coronal thirds by stereomicroscopic evaluation

*: Significantly different at p < 0.05 (Mann-Whitney test)

  • 1. Stabholz A, Friedman S. Endodontic retreatment-case selection and technique. part 2: Treatment planning for retreatment. J Endod 14:607-614. 1988.ArticlePubMed
  • 2. Friedman S, Rotstein I, Shar-Lev S. Bypassing gutta-percha root fillings with an automated device. J Endod 12:432-437. 1989.ArticlePubMed
  • 3. Krell KV, Neo J. The use of ultrasonic endodontic instrumentation in the retreatment of a paste-filled endodontic tooth. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol 60:100-102. 1985.ArticlePubMed
  • 4. Moshonov J, Trope M, Friedman S. Retreatment efficacy 3 months after obturation using glass ionomer cement, zinc oxide-eugenol, and epoxy resin sealers. J Endod 20:90-92. 1994.PubMed
  • 5. Wilcox LR, Juhlin JJ. Endodontic retreatment of ther-malfil versue lateral condensed gutta-percha. J Endod 20:115-117. 1994.PubMed
  • 6. Varawan S. Effectiveness of Profile.04 taper rotary instruments in endodontic retreatment. J Endod 26:100-103. 2000.ArticlePubMed
  • 7. Tamse A, Unger U, Metzger Z, Rosenberg M. Gutta-percha solvent-a comparative study. J Endod 12:337-339. 1986.PubMed
  • 8. Wennberg A, Ørstavik D. Evaluation of alternatives to chloroform in endodontic practice. Endod Dent Traumatol 5:234-237. 1989.PubMed
  • 9. Civjan S, Huget EF, Desimon LB. Potential applications of certain nickel-titanium(nitinol)alloys. J Dent Res 54:89-96. 1975.ArticlePubMedPDF
  • 10. Walia H, Brantley WA, Gerstein H. An initial investigation of the bending and torsional properties of nitinol root canal files. J Endod 14:346-351. 1988.ArticlePubMed
  • 11. Canalda-Sahli C, Brau-Aguade E, Berastegui-Jimeno E. A comparison of bending and torsional peoperties of K-files manufactured with different matallic alloys. Int Endod J 29:185-189. 1996.PubMed
  • 12. Zmener O, Balbachan L. Effectiveness of nickel-titanium files for preparing curved root canals. Endod Dent Traumatol 11:121-123. 1995.PubMed
  • 13. Glosson CR, Haller E H, Dove B, Del Rio CE. A comparison of root canal preparation using Ni-Ti engine-driven, and K-Flex endodontic instruments. J Endod 21:146-151. 1995.PubMed
  • 14. Kefah M. Gutta-percha retreatment: effectiveness of nickel-titanium rotary instruments versus stainless steel hand files. J Endod 28:454-456. 2002.ArticlePubMed
  • 15. Stephen C, Richard CB. pathway of the pulp. 8th Edn. St. Louis: Mosby; 888: 2002.
  • 16. Betti LV, Bramante C. Quantec SC rotary instruments versue hand files for gutta-percha removal in root canal retreatment. Int Endod J 34:514-519. 2001.PubMed
  • 17. Zuolo ML, Imura N, Ferreira MOF. Endodontic retreatment of thermafil or lateral condensation obturation in post space prepared teeth. J Endod 20:9-12. 1994.PubMed
  • 18. Nearing MV, Glickman GV. Comparative efficacy of various rotary instrumentation systems for gutta-percha removal. J Endod 25:225[abstract]. 1999.
  • 19. Wilcox LR, Krell KL, Madison S, Rittman B. Endodontic retreatment: Evaluation of gutta-percha and sealer removal and canal reininstrument. J Endod 13:453-457. 1987.PubMed
  • 20. Imura N, Zuolo ML, Ferreira MOF, Novo NF. Effectiveness of the canal finder and hand instrumentation in removal of gutta-percha root fillings during root canal retreatment. Int Endod J 29:382-386. 1996.ArticlePubMed

Tables & Figures

Figure 1.
Mean time for gutta-percha removal
jkacd-29-212f1.jpg
Figure 2.
The representive image showing score 0
jkacd-29-212f2.jpg
Figure 3.
The representive image showing score 1
jkacd-29-212f3.jpg
Figure 4.
The representive image showing score 2
jkacd-29-212f4.jpg
Figure 5.
The representive image showing score 3
jkacd-29-212f5.jpg
Table 1.
Group classification according to instruments
Group No. Instrument Manufacture
1 10 H-file (chloroform) Maillefer, Swiss
2 10 ProTaper Maillefer, Swiss
3 10 Profile Maillefer, Swiss
4 10 K3 Analytic, USA
Table 2.
Mean time to gutta-percha removal (unit : sec)
Group No. Mean S.D.
1 10 * 86.34
2 10 45.98
3 10 17.75
4 10 13.80

*: Significantly different at p < 0.05 (Tukey HSD test)

Table 3.
Distribution of scores for canal wall cleanlines by radiographic evaluation
Group Scores
0 1 2 3
1 A 3 7 0 0
M 6 3 1 0
C 9 1 0 0
2 A 0 7 1 2
M 4 4 1 1
C 4 3 1 2
3 A 4 6 0 0
M 6 4 0 0
C 9 1 0 0
4 A 1 4 2 3
M 3 7 0 0
C 10 0 0 0

(A : Apical 1/3, M : Middle 1/3, C : Coronal 1/3)

Table 4.
Distribution of scores for canal wall cleanlines by radiographic evaluation
Group Scores
0 1 2 3
1 A 2 8 0 0
M 7 3 0 0
C 8 2 0 0
2 A 0 4 5 1
M 3 6 1 0
C 3 5 0 2
3 A 4 6 0 0
M 7 2 1 0
C 9 1 0 0
4 A 1 2 2 5
M 7 3 0 0
C 10 0 0 0

(A : Apical 1/3, M : Middle 1/3, C : Coronal 1/3)

Table 5.
Statistical analysis of mean scores for canal wall cleanlines in apical thirds by radiographic evaluation

*:Significantly different at p < 0.05 (Mann-Whitney test)

Table 6.
Statistical analysis of mean scores for canal wall cleanlines in coronal thirds by radiographic evaluation

*: Significantly different at p < 0.05 (Mann-Whitney test)

Table 7.
Statistical analysis of mean scores for canal wall cleanlines in apical thirds by stereomicroscopic evaluation

*: Significantly different at p < 0.05 (Mann-Whitney test)

Table 8.
Statistical analysis of mean scores for canal wall cleanlines in coronal thirds by stereomicroscopic evaluation

*: Significantly different at p < 0.05 (Mann-Whitney test)

REFERENCES

  • 1. Stabholz A, Friedman S. Endodontic retreatment-case selection and technique. part 2: Treatment planning for retreatment. J Endod 14:607-614. 1988.ArticlePubMed
  • 2. Friedman S, Rotstein I, Shar-Lev S. Bypassing gutta-percha root fillings with an automated device. J Endod 12:432-437. 1989.ArticlePubMed
  • 3. Krell KV, Neo J. The use of ultrasonic endodontic instrumentation in the retreatment of a paste-filled endodontic tooth. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol 60:100-102. 1985.ArticlePubMed
  • 4. Moshonov J, Trope M, Friedman S. Retreatment efficacy 3 months after obturation using glass ionomer cement, zinc oxide-eugenol, and epoxy resin sealers. J Endod 20:90-92. 1994.PubMed
  • 5. Wilcox LR, Juhlin JJ. Endodontic retreatment of ther-malfil versue lateral condensed gutta-percha. J Endod 20:115-117. 1994.PubMed
  • 6. Varawan S. Effectiveness of Profile.04 taper rotary instruments in endodontic retreatment. J Endod 26:100-103. 2000.ArticlePubMed
  • 7. Tamse A, Unger U, Metzger Z, Rosenberg M. Gutta-percha solvent-a comparative study. J Endod 12:337-339. 1986.PubMed
  • 8. Wennberg A, Ørstavik D. Evaluation of alternatives to chloroform in endodontic practice. Endod Dent Traumatol 5:234-237. 1989.PubMed
  • 9. Civjan S, Huget EF, Desimon LB. Potential applications of certain nickel-titanium(nitinol)alloys. J Dent Res 54:89-96. 1975.ArticlePubMedPDF
  • 10. Walia H, Brantley WA, Gerstein H. An initial investigation of the bending and torsional properties of nitinol root canal files. J Endod 14:346-351. 1988.ArticlePubMed
  • 11. Canalda-Sahli C, Brau-Aguade E, Berastegui-Jimeno E. A comparison of bending and torsional peoperties of K-files manufactured with different matallic alloys. Int Endod J 29:185-189. 1996.PubMed
  • 12. Zmener O, Balbachan L. Effectiveness of nickel-titanium files for preparing curved root canals. Endod Dent Traumatol 11:121-123. 1995.PubMed
  • 13. Glosson CR, Haller E H, Dove B, Del Rio CE. A comparison of root canal preparation using Ni-Ti engine-driven, and K-Flex endodontic instruments. J Endod 21:146-151. 1995.PubMed
  • 14. Kefah M. Gutta-percha retreatment: effectiveness of nickel-titanium rotary instruments versus stainless steel hand files. J Endod 28:454-456. 2002.ArticlePubMed
  • 15. Stephen C, Richard CB. pathway of the pulp. 8th Edn. St. Louis: Mosby; 888: 2002.
  • 16. Betti LV, Bramante C. Quantec SC rotary instruments versue hand files for gutta-percha removal in root canal retreatment. Int Endod J 34:514-519. 2001.PubMed
  • 17. Zuolo ML, Imura N, Ferreira MOF. Endodontic retreatment of thermafil or lateral condensation obturation in post space prepared teeth. J Endod 20:9-12. 1994.PubMed
  • 18. Nearing MV, Glickman GV. Comparative efficacy of various rotary instrumentation systems for gutta-percha removal. J Endod 25:225[abstract]. 1999.
  • 19. Wilcox LR, Krell KL, Madison S, Rittman B. Endodontic retreatment: Evaluation of gutta-percha and sealer removal and canal reininstrument. J Endod 13:453-457. 1987.PubMed
  • 20. Imura N, Zuolo ML, Ferreira MOF, Novo NF. Effectiveness of the canal finder and hand instrumentation in removal of gutta-percha root fillings during root canal retreatment. Int Endod J 29:382-386. 1996.ArticlePubMed

Citations

Citations to this article as recorded by  
    CanvasJS.com

    • ePub LinkePub Link
    • Cite
      CITE
      export Copy Download
      Close
      Download Citation
      Download a citation file in RIS format that can be imported by all major citation management software, including EndNote, ProCite, RefWorks, and Reference Manager.
      Format:
      • RIS — For EndNote, ProCite, RefWorks, and most other reference management software
      • BibTeX — For JabRef, BibDesk, and other BibTeX-specific software
      Include:
      • Citation for the content below
      THE EFFECT OF GUTTA-PERCHA REMOVAL USING NICKEL-TITANIUM ROTARY INSTRUMENTS
      J Korean Acad Conserv Dent. 2004;29(3):212-218.   Published online January 14, 2004
      DOI: https://doi.org/10.5395/JKACD.2004.29.3.212
      Close
    • XML DownloadXML Download
    Figure
    • 0
    THE EFFECT OF GUTTA-PERCHA REMOVAL USING NICKEL-TITANIUM ROTARY INSTRUMENTS
    Image Image Image Image Image
    Figure 1. Mean time for gutta-percha removal
    Figure 2. The representive image showing score 0
    Figure 3. The representive image showing score 1
    Figure 4. The representive image showing score 2
    Figure 5. The representive image showing score 3

    Figure 1.

    Figure 2.

    Figure 3.

    Figure 4.

    Figure 5.

    THE EFFECT OF GUTTA-PERCHA REMOVAL USING NICKEL-TITANIUM ROTARY INSTRUMENTS
    Group No. Instrument Manufacture
    1 10 H-file (chloroform) Maillefer, Swiss
    2 10 ProTaper Maillefer, Swiss
    3 10 Profile Maillefer, Swiss
    4 10 K3 Analytic, USA
    Group No. Mean S.D.
    1 10 * 86.34
    2 10 45.98
    3 10 17.75
    4 10 13.80
    Group Scores
    0 1 2 3
    1 A 3 7 0 0
    M 6 3 1 0
    C 9 1 0 0
    2 A 0 7 1 2
    M 4 4 1 1
    C 4 3 1 2
    3 A 4 6 0 0
    M 6 4 0 0
    C 9 1 0 0
    4 A 1 4 2 3
    M 3 7 0 0
    C 10 0 0 0
    Group Scores
    0 1 2 3
    1 A 2 8 0 0
    M 7 3 0 0
    C 8 2 0 0
    2 A 0 4 5 1
    M 3 6 1 0
    C 3 5 0 2
    3 A 4 6 0 0
    M 7 2 1 0
    C 9 1 0 0
    4 A 1 2 2 5
    M 7 3 0 0
    C 10 0 0 0
    Table 1. Group classification according to instruments

    Table 2. Mean time to gutta-percha removal (unit : sec)

    : Significantly different at p < 0.05 (Tukey HSD test)

    Table 3. Distribution of scores for canal wall cleanlines by radiographic evaluation

    (A : Apical 1/3, M : Middle 1/3, C : Coronal 1/3)

    Table 4. Distribution of scores for canal wall cleanlines by radiographic evaluation

    (A : Apical 1/3, M : Middle 1/3, C : Coronal 1/3)

    Table 5. Statistical analysis of mean scores for canal wall cleanlines in apical thirds by radiographic evaluation

    *:Significantly different at p < 0.05 (Mann-Whitney test)

    Table 6. Statistical analysis of mean scores for canal wall cleanlines in coronal thirds by radiographic evaluation

    *: Significantly different at p < 0.05 (Mann-Whitney test)

    Table 7. Statistical analysis of mean scores for canal wall cleanlines in apical thirds by stereomicroscopic evaluation

    *: Significantly different at p < 0.05 (Mann-Whitney test)

    Table 8. Statistical analysis of mean scores for canal wall cleanlines in coronal thirds by stereomicroscopic evaluation

    *: Significantly different at p < 0.05 (Mann-Whitney test)

    Table 1.

    Table 2.

    Table 3.

    Table 4.

    Table 5.

    Table 6.

    Table 7.

    Table 8.

    Restor Dent Endod : Restorative Dentistry & Endodontics
    © The Korean Academy of Conservative Dentistry.
    Close layer
    TOP Mpgyi