Publication:
Comparison of the Effectiveness of Different Techniques for Supportive Removal of Root Canal Filling Material

dc.authorscopusid56348812200
dc.authorscopusid26967545200
dc.contributor.authorOzyurek, T.
dc.contributor.authorÖzsezer Demi̇Ryürek, E.O.
dc.date.accessioned2025-12-10T23:18:53Z
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.abstractObjective: To compare the cleanliness of oval cross-sectioned root canals after using different supportive techniques for removal of root canal filling material as part of retreatment process. Methods: One hundred mandibular canine teeth with flat oval cross-sectioned canals were instrumented up to #40.06 and obturated using the warm vertical compaction technique. Removal of the gutta-percha and sealer was performed using the D-RaCe nickel-titanium retreatment instruments. The roots were randomly divided into four groups of 25 teeth, and the activation processes were applied: XP-endo Finisher (XP), EndoActivator (EA) and IrrıSafe (IS). Conventional needle irrigation (CI) was used as the control group. The teeth were sectioned, and digital images were captured. The photographs were analysed using AutoCAD software regarding the area of residual root filling. Kruskal-Wallis and post hoc Dunn's tests were performed for statistical analysis. Results: There was significantly less gutta-percha and sealer remnant in the XP group than in the other groups (P<0.05). The CI group contained significantly more gutta-percha and sealer remnant than the other groups (P<0.05). The apical third of the CI group had significantly more residual gutta-percha and sealer when compared to that of the other groups (P<0.05). Conclusions: Within the limitations of this study, the amount of gutta-percha and sealer in the XP group was lower than that in the EA, IS, and CI groups. © 2016 Kare Publishing. All rights reserved.en_US
dc.identifier.doi10.5152/eej.2016.16002
dc.identifier.issn2548-0839
dc.identifier.issue1en_US
dc.identifier.scopus2-s2.0-85089673895
dc.identifier.scopusqualityQ2
dc.identifier.urihttps://doi.org/10.5152/eej.2016.16002
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12712/35342
dc.identifier.volume1en_US
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.publisherKare Publishingen_US
dc.relation.ispartofEuropean Endodontic Journalen_US
dc.relation.publicationcategoryMakale - Uluslararası Hakemli Dergi - Kurum Öğretim Elemanıen_US
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessen_US
dc.subjectEndoactivatoren_US
dc.subjectEndodonticsen_US
dc.subjectIrrisafeen_US
dc.subjectOval Canalsen_US
dc.subjectXP-Endo Finisheren_US
dc.titleComparison of the Effectiveness of Different Techniques for Supportive Removal of Root Canal Filling Materialen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dspace.entity.typePublication

Files