Influence of sealer and supplementary approach on filling material removal during endodontic retreatment

Jáder Camilo Pinto,Fernanda Ferrari Esteves Torres,Airton Oliveira Santos-Junior,Karina Ines Medina Carita Tavares,Juliane Maria Guerreiro-Tanomaru,Mário Tanomaru-Filho
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1590/1807-3107bor-2024.vol38.0022
2024-07-12
Abstract:Both root canal sealer-based and supplementary protocols may influence removal of filling material during endodontic retreatment. Mesial root canals of extracted mandibular molars were prepared using HyFlex EDM 25/.08, and filled with a calcium silicate sealer (Bio-C Sealer), or an epoxy resin (AH Plus), using the single cone technique (n = 12). Retreatment was performed using ProDesign Logic (PDL) RT and PDL 35/.05. The specimens were randomly divided into two experimental groups (n = 12), and the sealers were distributed similarly. A supplementary protocol was performed with PDL 50/.01 or XP-endo Finisher. Root canal transportation and volume, in addition to the remaining filling material percentage were evaluated using high-resolution (5 µm voxel size) micro-CT. Statistical analysis was performed using t-tests (α = 0.05). Root canals filled with AH Plus presented high residual filling material (p < 0.05). Both protocols decreased residual volume of filling material in the apical third (p < 0.05). PDL 50/.01 increased the apical root canal volume (p < 0.05). No difference was observed between the systems regarding canal transportation (p > 0.05). In conclusion, AH Plus is more difficult to remove from the apical third than Bio-C Sealer. PDL 50/.01 and XP-endo Finisher enabled greater removal of filling materials in the apical third, in the retreatment of curved root canals, without promoting apical transport.
What problem does this paper attempt to address?