Publication: Efficacy of Different Nickel-Titanium Instruments in Removing Gutta-Percha During Root Canal Retreatment
| dc.authorscopusid | 56348812200 | |
| dc.authorscopusid | 26967545200 | |
| dc.contributor.author | Ozyurek, T. | |
| dc.contributor.author | Özsezer Demi̇Ryürek, E.O. | |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2020-06-21T13:33:47Z | |
| dc.date.available | 2020-06-21T13:33:47Z | |
| dc.date.issued | 2016 | |
| dc.department | Ondokuz Mayıs Üniversitesi | en_US |
| dc.department-temp | [Ozyurek] Taha, Department of Endodontics, Ondokuz Mayis Üniversitesi, Samsun, Turkey; [Özsezer Demi̇Ryürek] Ebru, Department of Endodontics, Ondokuz Mayis Üniversitesi, Samsun, Turkey | en_US |
| dc.description.abstract | Introduction The aim of this study was to compare the cleanliness of root canal walls after retreatment using ProTaper Next (PTN; Dentsply Maillefer, Ballaigues, Switzerland), Twisted File Adaptive (TFA; Axis/SybronEndo, Orange, CA), Reciproc (PRC; VDW, Munich, Germany), and ProTaper Universal retreatment (PTR, Dentsply Maillefer) nickel-titanium systems and the time required for gutta-percha and sealer removal. Methods Eighty human maxillary central incisors with single and straight root canals were instrumented up to #40.02 with manual K-files (Dentsply Maillefer) and obturated using the continuous wave of condensation technique. Removal of the gutta-percha and sealer was performed using 1 of the following nickel-titanium systems: PTN, TFA, RPC, or PTR. The teeth were sectioned, and digital images were captured. The photographs were analyzed using AutoCAD software (Autodesk, San Rafael, CA). Also, the total time required for gutta-percha removal was calculated by a chronometer. Results The total retreatment time was significantly shorter in the PTR group compared with the other groups (P <.05). There was a significant difference between the groups according to the total residual gutta-percha and sealer (P <.05). The PTN and PTR groups left significantly less gutta-percha and sealer remnant than the TFA and RPC groups (P <.05). Conclusions Within the limitations of this study, the PTN and the PTR groups showed less residual gutta-percha and sealer than the TFA and RPC groups. The time required for gutta-percha and sealer removal was similar for all the groups, except for the PTR group. © 2016 American Association of Endodontists. | en_US |
| dc.identifier.doi | 10.1016/j.joen.2016.01.007 | |
| dc.identifier.endpage | 649 | en_US |
| dc.identifier.issn | 0099-2399 | |
| dc.identifier.issn | 1878-3554 | |
| dc.identifier.issue | 4 | en_US |
| dc.identifier.pmid | 26898565 | |
| dc.identifier.scopus | 2-s2.0-84958576623 | |
| dc.identifier.scopusquality | Q1 | |
| dc.identifier.startpage | 646 | en_US |
| dc.identifier.uri | https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2016.01.007 | |
| dc.identifier.volume | 42 | en_US |
| dc.identifier.wos | WOS:000373241900022 | |
| dc.identifier.wosquality | Q1 | |
| dc.language.iso | en | en_US |
| dc.publisher | Elsevier Inc. | en_US |
| dc.relation.ispartof | Journal of Endodontics | en_US |
| dc.relation.journal | Journal of Endodontics | en_US |
| dc.relation.publicationcategory | Makale - Uluslararası Hakemli Dergi - Kurum Öğretim Elemanı | en_US |
| dc.rights | info:eu-repo/semantics/closedAccess | en_US |
| dc.subject | Protaper Next | en_US |
| dc.subject | Reciprocation | en_US |
| dc.subject | Retreatment | en_US |
| dc.subject | Root Canal Filling | en_US |
| dc.subject | Twisted File Adaptive | en_US |
| dc.title | Efficacy of Different Nickel-Titanium Instruments in Removing Gutta-Percha During Root Canal Retreatment | en_US |
| dc.type | Article | en_US |
| dspace.entity.type | Publication |
