Evaluation of apically extruded debris during removal of gutta-percha and Resilon™ using different instrumentation techniques

Dragana Pešić; Irena Melih; Veljko Kolak; Ana Nikitović; Ankica Jakovljević

doi:10.2298/VSP160226321P

Dragana Pešić Faculty of stomatology Pancevo, University Business Academy Novi Sad, Serbia
Irena Melih Faculty of stomatology Pancevo, University Business Academy Novi Sad, Serbia
Veljko Kolak Faculty of stomatology Pancevo, University Business Academy Novi Sad, Serbia
Ana Nikitović Faculty of stomatology Pancevo, University Business Academy Novi Sad, Serbia
Ankica Jakovljević Faculty of stomatology Pancevo, University Business Academy Novi Sad, Serbia

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2298/VSP160226321P

Keywords: root canal filling materials, gutta-percha, pit and fissure sealant, dental instruments, methods

Abstract

Background/Aim. Apical extrusion of material is considered as one of the very important factor for endodontic treatment success. Microorganisms, necrotic tissue, filling material and irrigants, which can be extruded apically during endodontic retreatment, may jeopardize the success of the therapy. The aim of this in vitro study was to quantitatively evaluate the amount of apically extruded debris during endodontic retreatment of teeth obturated with two different materials, using one hand and three rotary instrumentation techniques. Methods. Ninety-six extracted single-rooted teeth were endodontically treated and enlarged to size 40 using BioRaCe system, and then randomly divided into 8 groups of 12 specimens each. Half of the specimens were obturated with gutta-percha and AH Plus® sealer and another half with RealSeal SE system, using lateral condensation technique. Retreatment was performed using: Hedström files; ProFile rotary files; ProTaper Retreatment system and D-RaCe system. Apically extruded debris was collected in pre-weighed Eppendorf tubes and evaluated using an electronic microbalance. Data were analyzed statistically using t-test and analysis of variance. Results. In the AH Plus/gutta-percha group, all tested rotary instruments gave significantly less extruded debris compared with Hedström files (p < 0.05). In theRealSeal group, there was significant difference between D-RaCe and Hedström instruments (p < 0.05). Conclusion. All retreatment techniques resulted in apical extrusion. D-RaCe system produced significantly less extruded debris compared to hand files. No significant difference was found when comparing two instruments specially designed for retreatment: D-RaCe and ProTaper systems.

References

Al-Omari MA, Dummer PM. Canal blockage and debris extru-sion with eight preparation techniques. J Endod 1995; 21(3): 154−8.

Tanalp J, Kaptan F, Sert S, Kayahan B, Bayirl G. Quantitative evaluation of the amount of apically extruded debris using 3 different rotary instrumentation systems. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 2006; 101(2): 250−7.

Huang X, Ling J, Wei X, Gu L. Quantitative evaluation of de-bris extruded apically by using ProTaper Universal Tulsa ro-tary system in endodontic retreatment. J Endod 2007; 33(9): 1102−5.

Üstün Y, Çanakçi BC, Dinçer AN, Er O, Düzgün S. Evaluation of apically extruded debris associated with several Ni-Ti sys-tems. Int Endod J 2015; 48(7): 701−4.

Ferraz CC, Gomes NV, Gomes BP, Zaia AA, Teixeira FB, Souza-Filho FJ. Apical extrusion of debris and irrigants using two hand and three engine-driven instrumentation techniques. Int Endod J 2001; 34(5): 354−8.

Azar NG, Ebrahimi G. Apically-extruded debris using the Pro-Taper system. Aust Endod J 2005; 31(1): 21−3.

Tinaz AC, Alacam T, Uzun O, Maden M, Kayaoglu G. The effect of disruption of apical constriction on periapical extrusion. J Endod 2005; 31(7): 533−5.

Kustarci A, Akdemir N, Siso SH, Altunbas D. Apical extrusion of intracanal debris using two engine driven and step-back in-strumentation techniques: An in-vitro study. Eur J Dent 2008; 2(4): 233−9.

Bharathi G, Chacko Y, Lakshminarayanan L. An in-vitro analysis of gutta-percha removal using three different techniques. En-dodontology 2002; 14: 41−5.

Lu Y, Wang R, Zhang L, Li HL, Zheng QH, Zhou XD, et al. Apically extruded debris and irrigant with two Ni-Ti systems and hand files when removing root fillings: A laboratory study. Int Endod J 2013; 46: 1125−30.

Lotfi M, Ghasemi N, Rahim S, Vosoughhossein S, Saghiri MA, Resilon SA. A Comprehensive Literature Review. J Dent Res Dent Clin Dent Prospects 2013; 7(3): 119−30.

Somma F, Cammarota G, Plotino G, Grande NM, Pameijer CH. The effectiveness of manual and mechanical instrumentation for the retreatment of three different root canal filling mate-rials. J Endod 2008; 34: 466−9.

Al-Haddad A, Che AA. Apically extruded debris during removal of realseal using two re-treatment rotary systems. Aust J Basic App Sci 2011; 5(3): 114−9.

Schneider SW. A comparison of canal preparations in straight and curved root canals. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol 1971; 32(2): 271−5.

Myers GL, Montgomery S. A comparison of weights of debris extruded apically by conventional filing and Canal Master techniques. J Endod 1991; 17(6): 275−9.

Nair PN, Sjögren U, Kahnberg KE, Sundqvist G. Intraradicular bacteria and fungi in root-filled asymptomatic human teeth with therapy-resistant periapical lesions: a long-term light and electron microscopic follow-up study. J Endod 1990; 16(12): 580−8.

Sjögren U1, Sundqvist G, Nair PN.Tissue reaction on gutta-percha particles of various sizes when implanted subcuta-neously in guinea pigs. Eur J Oral Sci 1995; 103(5): 313−21.

Bramante CM, Betti LV. Efficacy of Quantec rotary in-struments for gutta-percha removal. Int Endod J 2000; 33(5): 463−7.

Betti LV, Bramante CM. Quantec SC rotary instruments versus hand files for gutta-percha removal in root canal retreatment. Int Endod J 2001; 34(7): 514−9.

Hülsmann M, Bluhm V. Efficacy, cleaning ability and safety of different rotary NiTi instruments in root canal retreatment. Int Endod J 2004; 37(7): 468−76.

Schirrmeister JF, Wrbas KT, Schneider FH, Altenburger MJ, Hellwig E. Effectiveness of a hand file and three nickel-titanium rotary instruments for removing gutta-percha in curved root canals during retreatment. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 2006; 101: 542−7.

Ünal GC, Kaya BU, Taç AG, Keçeci AD. A comparison of the efficacy of conventional and new retreatment instruments to remove gutta-percha in curved root canals: An ex vivo study. Int Endod J 2009; 42(4): 344−50.

Mollo A, Botti G, Prinicipi Goldoni N, Randellini E, Paragliola R, Chazine M, et al. Efficacy of two Ni- Ti systems and hand files for removing gutta-percha from root canals. Int Endod J 2012; 45(1): 1−6.

Dincer AN, Er O, Canakci BC. Evaluation of apically extruded debris during root 24. canal retreatment with several NiTi sys-tems. Int Endod J 2015; 48(12): 1194−8.

Saad AY, Al-Hadlaq SM, Al-Katheeri NH. Efficacy of two rotary NiTi instruments in the removal of Gutta-Percha during root canal retreatment. J Endod 2007; 33(1): 38−41.

Imura N, Kato AS, Hata GI, Uemura M, Toda T, Weine F. A comparison of the relative efficacies of four hand and rotary instrumentation techniques during endodontic retreatment. Int Endod J 2000; 33(4): 361−6.

Topçuoğlu HS, Aktı A, Tuncay Ö, Dinçer AN, Düzgün S, Topçuoğlu G. Evaluation of debris extruded apically during the removal of root canal filling material using ProTaper, D-RaCe, and R-Endo rotary nickel-titanium retreatment instruments and hand files. J Endod 2014; 40(12): 2066−9.

Kustarci A, Altunbas D, Akpinar KE. Comparative study of api-cally extruded debris using one manual and two rotary instru-mentation techniques for endodontic retreatment. J Dent Sci 2012; 7: 1−6.

Duncan HF, Chong BS. Removal of root filling materials. Endod Topics 2011; 19(1): 33−57.