ProTaper Retreatment System Research Articles

Efficacy of ProTaper Retreatment System in Root Canals Obturated with Gutta-Percha Using Two Different Sealers and GuttaFlow

Objective. To compare the efficacy of ProTaper retreatment files in removing three different obturating materials. Study Design. Forty-five human, single-rooted premolars were divided into three experimental groups. Group 1 was obturated with gutta-percha and AH Plus sealer, Group 2 was obturated with gutta-percha and zinc oxide eugenol sealer, and Group 3 was obturated with GuttaFlow. Retreatment was done using the ProTaper universal rotary retreatment files. Root halves were visualized using magnifying loops at 3X magnification and optical stereomicroscope at 10X magnification. Images were analyzed using AutoCAD 2004 software to calculate area of the remaining debris in the canal. For statistical analysis were used variance test and ANOVA. Results. Total debris/canal area ratio between the three groups showed a statistically significant difference (P < 0.001). Conclusion. ProTaper retreatment system did not produce completely clean canals in any of the groups. However, it had the best efficacy towards removing silicon based obturating material GuttaFlow.

Comparison of debris extruded apically and working time used by ProTaper Universal rotary and ProTaper retreatment system during gutta-percha removal

ObjectiveThe aim of this study was to evaluate the in vitro action of ProTaper retreatment files and ProTaper Universal in the retreatment of mandibular premolars. Material and methodsThe amount of debris extruded apically was measured and the time to reach the working length and to complete the removal of gutta-percha was observed. Thirty teeth had their canals prepared using ProTaper Universal files and were obturated by the single cone technique. The teeth were then stored at 37ºC in a humid environment for 7 days. During the use of the rotary instruments for root canal filling removal, the apical portions of the teeth were attached to the open end of a resin tube to collect the apically extruded debris. ResultsProTaper Universal files were significantly faster (p=0.0011) than the ProTaper retreatment files to perform gutta-percha removal, but no significant difference was found between the files regarding the time to reach the working length or the amount of apical extrusion. ConclusionsProTaper Universal rotary had better results for endodontic retreatment, and both techniques promote similar apical extrusion of debris.

Efficacy of ProTaper Retreatment System in Root Canals Filled with Gutta-Percha and Two Endodontic Sealers

This study evaluated the efficacy of ProTaper Universal rotary retreatment system and hand files for filling material removal during retreatment and the influence of sealer type on the presence of filling debris in the reinstrumented canals. The canals of 60 palatal roots of first molars were obturated with gutta-percha and either a zinc oxide–eugenol–based or a resin-based sealer and reinstrumented: G1, EndoFill/hand files; G2, AH Plus/hand files; G3, EndoFill/ProTaper; G4, AH Plus/ProTaper. Roots were cleaved and examined with an optical microscope, and the amount of filling debris on canal walls was analyzed on digitized images. There was no significant difference ( P > .05) among the root canal thirds within each group. G3 presented significantly more filling debris than G1 in the cervical third ( P = .04). In the middle third, G2/G3/G4 showed more debris than G1 ( P = .03). The techniques were similar ( P = .64) in the apical third. All groups presented filling debris in the 3 canal thirds after reinstrumentation.