Publication:
Efficacy of Different Nickel-Titanium Instruments in Removing Gutta-Percha During Root Canal Retreatment

dc.authorscopusid56348812200
dc.authorscopusid26967545200
dc.contributor.authorOzyurek, T.
dc.contributor.authorÖzsezer Demi̇Ryürek, E.O.
dc.date.accessioned2020-06-21T13:33:47Z
dc.date.available2020-06-21T13:33:47Z
dc.date.issued2016
dc.departmentOndokuz Mayıs Üniversitesien_US
dc.department-temp[Ozyurek] Taha, Department of Endodontics, Ondokuz Mayis Üniversitesi, Samsun, Turkey; [Özsezer Demi̇Ryürek] Ebru, Department of Endodontics, Ondokuz Mayis Üniversitesi, Samsun, Turkeyen_US
dc.description.abstractIntroduction 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.doi10.1016/j.joen.2016.01.007
dc.identifier.endpage649en_US
dc.identifier.issn0099-2399
dc.identifier.issn1878-3554
dc.identifier.issue4en_US
dc.identifier.pmid26898565
dc.identifier.scopus2-s2.0-84958576623
dc.identifier.scopusqualityQ1
dc.identifier.startpage646en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2016.01.007
dc.identifier.volume42en_US
dc.identifier.wosWOS:000373241900022
dc.identifier.wosqualityQ1
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.publisherElsevier Inc.en_US
dc.relation.ispartofJournal of Endodonticsen_US
dc.relation.journalJournal of Endodonticsen_US
dc.relation.publicationcategoryMakale - Uluslararası Hakemli Dergi - Kurum Öğretim Elemanıen_US
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/closedAccessen_US
dc.subjectProtaper Nexten_US
dc.subjectReciprocationen_US
dc.subjectRetreatmenten_US
dc.subjectRoot Canal Fillingen_US
dc.subjectTwisted File Adaptiveen_US
dc.titleEfficacy of Different Nickel-Titanium Instruments in Removing Gutta-Percha During Root Canal Retreatmenten_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dspace.entity.typePublication

Files