Abstract
This study aimed to compare the efficacy of XP-endo Finisher R and IrriSafe, with a solvent mixture of Methyl ethyl ketone/Tetrachloroethylene (MEK/TCE), in the removal of root filling residues. Twenty-four human mandibular incisors were pair-matched by micro-computed tomography according to volume and aspect ratio. After retreatment, specimens were allocated to two experimental groups (n = 12), according to the supplementary instrument used. The volume of residual filling material after each irrigating step and the time for retreatment was calculated. Statistical analyses were carried out using Mann–Whitney test, with a significance level of 5%. The volume of initial root canal filling material between the groups was similar (p > 0.05). With the final irrigation protocol (NaOCl and EDTA) the volume of the filling remnants decreased significantly (p < 0.05) with no differences between IrriSafe or XP-endo Finisher R (p > 0.05). The additional solvent mixture MEK/TCE increased the efficiency of filling materials reduction, regardless of the agitating instruments employed, IrriSafe or XP-endo Finisher R (p < 0.05). There was no difference between the two groups regarding the time (p = 0.149). Both supplementary instruments were effective in the reduction of filling remnants. The additional step with a solvent mixture of MEK/TCE enabled a total recovery of patency and the achievement of cleaner canals, independently of the agitation instrument.
Highlights
An increase in the prevalence of apical periodontitis has been recently reported worldwide, in endodontically treated teeth[1]
The Mann–Whitney test confirmed that the obturation volume was similar between the groups [Group 1: median for 1–5 mm = 0.584 (0.333–0.652) and for 1–10 mm = 2.718 (2.186–3.189); Group 2: median for 1–5 mm = 0.502 (0.340–0.599) and for 1–10 mm = 2.438 (2.196–3.982)], which permitted a uniform comparison (p = 0.094 for 1–5 mm and p = 0.325 for 1–10 mm)
There were no differences between IrriSafe or XP-endo Finisher R (p < 0.05), Figs. 1 and 2
Summary
An increase in the prevalence of apical periodontitis has been recently reported worldwide, in endodontically treated teeth[1]. Mechanical agitation driven by novel finishing instruments like XP-endo Finisher R (FKG Dentaire, La Chauxde-Fonds, Switzerland), developed to boost cleaning during retreatment, were shown to improve the filling removal[15,22,23,24] This new variation has a semi-active tip and a larger core diameter (size 30) which distinguishes it from its XP-endo Finisher counterpart. Few studies have assessed the impact of solvents, fearing the messy effect of the softened gutta-percha and the harder and more time-consuming process of cleaning it from root canal walls[26] Retreatment files, such as XP-endo Finisher R, are recommended by their manufacturers to be associated to s olvents[25]. Using microcomputed tomographic (micro-CT) imaging to quantify the filling material volume in the different retreatment stages this study had 3 main objectives: (i) to compare the efficacy of XP-endo Finisher R and IrriSafe with the solvent mixture MEK/TCE, in removing root filling remnants from mandibular incisors’ canals (ii) to assess the additional cleaning effect of a solvent mixture exposure and (iii) to quantify the retreatment time with the use of solvents
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary 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.
