The purpose of this study was to compare the occurrence of microcracks in teeth prepared with different retreatment systems using microcomputed tomography (micro-CT).
Methods
Forty-two freshly extracted mandibular premolar teeth were used. The root canals were instrumented with stainless steel K-files to an apical size of 35/.02 using the balanced-force technique and were obturated using the passive compaction technique. The specimens were divided into 3 experimental groups according to retreatment system used (n = 14): ProTaper Universal retreatment (PTUR), Mtwo retreatment (MTR), or D-RaCe retreatment (D-RC) systems. Each specimen was scanned using a high-resolution micro-CT system before instrumentation, after obturation, and after the removal of the filling material. The images were evaluated, and the presence of microcracks was recorded.
Results
The PTUR system demonstrated the highest percentage, while MTR and D-RC retreatment systems resulted in similar numbers of microcracks.
Conclusions
Clinicians should be aware that all retreatment systems may cause microcracks.
KvistT., ReitC.. Results of endodontic retreatment: a randomized clinical study comparing surgical and nonsurgical procedures.J Endod.1999; 25(12): 814–817.
2.
StabholzA., FriedmanS.. Endodontic retreatmentcase selection and technique. Part 2: Treatment planning for retreatment.J Endod.1988; 14(12): 607–614.
3.
HülsmannM., BluhmV.. Efficacy, cleaning ability and safety of different rotary NiTi instruments in root canal retreatment.Int Endod J.2004; 37(7): 468–476.
4.
MandelE., FriedmanS.. Endodontic retreatment: a rational approach to root canal reinstrumentation.J Endod.1992; 18(11): 565–569.
5.
ImuraN., ZuoloM.L., FerreiraM.O., NovoN.F.. Effectiveness of the Canal Finder and hand instrumentation in removal of gutta-percha root fillings during root canal retreatment.Int Endod J.1996; 29(6): 382–386.
6.
HülsmannM., StotzS.. Efficacy, cleaning ability and safety of different devices for gutta-percha removal in root canal retreatment.Int Endod J.1997; 30(4): 227–233.
7.
de OliveiraD.P., BarbizamJ.V., TropeM., TeixeiraF.B.. Comparison between gutta-percha and resilon removal using two different techniques in endodontic retreatment.J Endod.2006; 32(4): 362–364.
8.
GiulianiV., CocchettiR., PagavinoG.. Efficacy of ProTaper universal retreatment files in removing filling materials during root canal retreatment.J Endod.2008; 34(11): 1381–1384.
9.
GuL.S., LingJ.Q., WeiX., HuangX.Y.. Efficacy of ProTaper Universal rotary retreatment system for gutta-percha removal from root canals.Int Endod J.2008; 41(4): 288–295.
10.
MarfisiK., MercadeM., PlotinoG., Duran-SindreuF., BuenoR., RoigM.. Efficacy of three different rotary files to remove gutta-percha and Resilon from root canals.Int Endod J.2010; 43(11): 1022–1028.
11.
RödigT., HausdörferT., KonietschkeF., DullinC., HahnW., HülsmannM.. Efficacy of D-RaCe and ProTaper Universal Retreatment NiTi instruments and hand files in removing gutta-percha from curved root canals - a micro-computed tomography study.Int Endod J.2012; 45(6): 580–589.
12.
SchäferE., ErlerM., DammaschkeT.. Comparative study on the shaping ability and cleaning efficiency of rotary Mtwo instruments. Part 1. Shaping ability in simulated curved canals.Int Endod J.2006; 39(3): 196–202.
13.
ShemeshH., BierC.A., WuM.K., Tanomaru-FilhoM., WesselinkP.R.. The effects of canal preparation and filling on the incidence of dentinal defects.Int Endod J.2009; 42(3): 208–213.
14.
BarretoM.S., MoraesRdoA, RosaR.A., MoreiraC.H., SóM.V., BierC.A.. Vertical root fractures and dentin defects: effects of root canal preparation, filling, and mechanical cycling.J Endod.2012; 38(8): 1135–1139.
15.
De-DeusG., BelladonnaF.G., SouzaE.M.. Micro-computed Tomographic Assessment on the Effect of ProTaper Next and Twisted File Adaptive Systems on Dentinal Cracks.J Endod.2015; 41(7): 1116–1119.
16.
CeyhanliK.T., ErdilekN., TatarI., CelikD.. Comparison of ProTaper, RaCe and Safesider instruments in the induction of dentinal microcracks: a micro-CT study.Int Endod J.2016; 49(7): 684–689.
17.
De-DeusG., SilvaE.J., MarinsJ.. Lack of causal relationship between dentinal microcracks and root canal preparation with reciprocation systems.J Endod.2014; 40(9): 1447–1450.
18.
TopçuoğbluH.S., DemirbugaS., TuncayÖ, PalaK., ArslanH., KarataşE.. The effects of Mtwo, R-Endo, and D-RaCe retreatment instruments on the incidence of dentinal defects during the removal of root canal filling material.J Endod.2014; 40(2): 266–270.
19.
GargS., MahajanP., ThamanD., MongaP.. Comparison of dentinal damage induced by different nickel-titanium rotary instruments during canal preparation: An in vitro study.J Conserv Dent.2015; 18(4): 302–305.
20.
BierC.A., ShemeshH., Tanomaru-FilhoM., WesselinkP.R., WuM.K.. The ability of different nickel-titanium rotary instruments to induce dentinal damage during canal preparation.J Endod.2009; 35(2): 236–238.
21.
LiuR., HouB.X., WesselinkP.R., WuM.K., ShemeshH.. The incidence of root microcracks caused by 3 different single-file systems versus the ProTaper system.J Endod.2013; 39(8): 1054–1056.
22.
YoldaşO., YilmazS., AtakanG., KudenC., KasanZ.. Dentinal microcrack formation during root canal preparations by different NiTi rotary instruments and the self-adjusting file.J Endod.2012; 38(2): 232–235.
23.
RoaneJ.B., SabalaC.L., DuncansonM.G.Jr.. The balanced force concept for instrumentation of curved canals.J Endod.1985; 11(5): 203–211.
24.
SouzaE.M., WuM.K., ShemeshH., Bonetti-FilhoI., WesselinkP.R.. Comparability of results from two leakage models.Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod.2008; 106(2): 309–313.
25.
ShemeshH., RoeleveldA.C., WesselinkP.R., WuM.K.. Damage to root dentin during retreatment procedures.J Endod.2011; 37(1): 63–66.
26.
AshwinkumarV., KrithikadattaJ., SurendranS., VelmuruganN.. Effect of reciprocating file motion on microcrack formation in root canals: an SEM study.Int Endod J.2014; 47(7): 622–627.
