Abstract
The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy of Mtwo, ProTaper retreatment files and Hedström files for the retreatment of root canals filled with BeeFill 2 in1 and cold lateral compaction techniques. 63 single-rooted human teeth were prepared with Mtwo rotary files to size 35/.04 and assigned into three groups (n=21/group). (1) BeeFill 2 in1/2Seal, (2) BeeFill 2 in1/AH26 and (3) laterally-compacted gutta-percha/AH26. The specimens were subgrouped according to the file system used to remove root fillings (n=7/subgroup): 1. Mtwo retreatment file, 2. ProTaper retreatment file, 3. Hedström file. Roots were split longitudinally and photographed. The time required for removal of root canal fillings and the areas of residual root filling materials were compared statistically (p<0.05). The maximum amount of remnant was observed in the Mtwo group for removal of BeeFill 2 in1/AH26. ProTaper retreatment files required less time to remove root filling material than Mtwo retreatment files and Hedström files (p<0.05). Among the tested removal systems, ProTaper retreatment files may offer the best efficiency-speed combination.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
