A Comparative Evaluation of Canal Transportation and Centering Ability with Three Different Retreatment File Systems– An In vitro CBCT Study

Abstract

AIM: The study aimed to compare the canal transportation and centering ability of the three different retreatment file systems using cone-beam computed tomography imaging (CBCT).
 Methodology: Thirty three single-rooted, mandibular premolars were prepared up to ProTaper Gold size F2. Post intrumentation CBCT imaging was taken for all the samples. Obturation is done. The samples were randomly assigned to three different retreatment groups (n = 11), Group I: Pro Taper Universal retreatment kit, Group II: Mtwo R, and Group III: Xp endoshaper. Retreatment was done for all the samples using respective file systems followed by a Post-retreatment CBCT imaging. The two scans were compared both bucco-lingually and mesiodistally to determine canal transportation and centering ability at 3 mm, 6 mm, and 9 mm from the apex using DICOM Software. The results obtained were tabulated and statistically analyzed using One way Anova and Post hoc tukey test.
 Results: The mean canal transportation was least for Xp endoshaper (Group III). A Significant difference in canal transportation and centering ability was not observed at all three levels from the apex.
 Conclusion: Under in-vitro conditions, all three file systems have shown similar efficacy concerning canal transportation and centering ability. Based on mean values, canal transportation was higher for PTUR, followed by Mtwo R and Xp endo shaper in mesiodistal and buccolingual directions at 3, 6 and 9mm, and canal centering ability XP endo shaper stay centered followed by Mtwo R and PTUR in mesiodistal and buccolingual directions at 3, 6 and 9 mm.