Publication:
Apically Extruded Debris After Retreatment Procedure With Reciproc, ProTaper Next, and Twisted File Adaptive Instruments

dc.authorscopusid57193440556
dc.authorscopusid56348812200
dc.contributor.authorYılmaz, K.
dc.contributor.authorOzyurek, T.
dc.date.accessioned2020-06-21T13:26:31Z
dc.date.available2020-06-21T13:26:31Z
dc.date.issued2017
dc.departmentOndokuz Mayıs Üniversitesien_US
dc.department-temp[Yılmaz] Koray, Department of Endodontics, Ondokuz Mayis Üniversitesi, Samsun, Turkey; [Ozyurek] Taha, Department of Endodontics, Ondokuz Mayis Üniversitesi, Samsun, Turkeyen_US
dc.description.abstractIntroduction The aim of this study was to compare the amount of debris extruded from the apex during retreatment procedures with ProTaper Next (PTN; Dentsply Maillefer, Ballaigues, Switzerland), Reciproc (RCP; VDW, Munich, Germany), and Twisted File Adaptive (TFA; SybronEndo, Orange, CA) files and the duration of these retreatment procedures. Methods Ninety upper central incisor teeth were prepared and filled with gutta-percha and AH Plus sealer (Dentsply DeTrey, Konstanz, Germany) using the vertical compaction technique. The teeth were randomly divided into 3 groups of 30 for removal of the root filling material with PTN, RCP, and TFA files. The apically extruded debris was collected in preweighed Eppendorf tubes. The time for gutta-percha removal was recorded. Data were statistically analyzed using Kruskal-Wallis and 1-way analysis of variance tests. Results The amount of debris extruded was RPC > TFA > PTN, respectively. Compared with the PTN group, the amount of debris extruded in the RPC group was statistically significantly higher (P < .001). There was no statistically significant difference among the RCP, TFA, and PTN groups regarding the time for retreatment (P > .05). Conclusions Within the limitations of this in vitro study, all groups were associated with debris extrusion from the apex. The RCP file system led to higher levels of apical extrusion in proportion to the PTN file system. In addition, there was no significant difference among groups in the duration of the retreatment procedures. © 2017 American Association of Endodontistsen_US
dc.identifier.doi10.1016/j.joen.2016.12.003
dc.identifier.endpage651en_US
dc.identifier.issn0099-2399
dc.identifier.issn1878-3554
dc.identifier.issue4en_US
dc.identifier.pmid28258810
dc.identifier.scopus2-s2.0-85014049326
dc.identifier.scopusqualityQ1
dc.identifier.startpage648en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2016.12.003
dc.identifier.volume43en_US
dc.identifier.wosWOS:000398249400024
dc.identifier.wosqualityQ1
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.publisherElsevier Inc. usjcs@elsevier.comen_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.subjectApical Extrusionen_US
dc.subjectProTaper Nexten_US
dc.subjectReciprocen_US
dc.subjectRetreatmenten_US
dc.subjectTwisted File Adaptiveen_US
dc.titleApically Extruded Debris After Retreatment Procedure With Reciproc, ProTaper Next, and Twisted File Adaptive Instrumentsen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dspace.entity.typePublication

Files