Efficiency of ProTaper Universal Retreatment, Reciproc Blue and XP-endo Shaper in the removal of a bioceramic-based root canal filling

Abstract

Purpose: This in vitro study aimed to assess the performance of ProTaper Universal Retreatment (PTUR), Reciproc Blue (RB), and XP-endo Shaper (XPS) system in the removal of bioceramic root canal filling. Materials and Methods: Forty-five human single-rooted mandibular premolars were prepared up to 30/.04 and filled with Endosequence BC sealer and BC points before being assigned into three groups (n=15). The root canal fillings were removed until reaching predetermined working length (WL) with PTUR in group 1, RB in group 2, and XPS in group 3. During the removal of the filling material, apically extruded debris was collected in preweighed Eppendorf tubes, and operation time was recorded with a digital chronometer. Reaching the WL and maintaining apical patency were evaluated separately. The data were statistically analyzed using Kruskal Wallis and Mann Whitney U tests. Results: The mean amount of extruded debris was highest in the PTUR group, although all instruments caused apical extrusion of debris. The mean time for reaching WL was longest for RB and shortest for XPS, with significant differences among the groups (p<0.05). Although the difference was not significant (p=0.799), in the PTUR group the WL was reached in 93.3% of the samples, which was higher than other groups (86.7%). Conclusion: All tested systems caused a certain amount of debris extrusion. XPS was associated with less extrusion while regaining more rapid access to the periapical area than PTUR and RB.

Keywords

• Debris extrusion
• endodontic retreatment
• Endosequence BC sealer
• Reciproc Blue
• XP-endo Shaper

References

1. Torabinejad M, White SN. Endodontic treatment opti canal treatment: alternatives to single-tooth implants. J Am Dent Assoc 2016;147:214-20. google scholar
2. Stabholz A, Friedman S. Endodontic retreatment—case selection and technique. Part 2: treatment planning for retreatment. J Endod 1988;14:607-14. google scholar
3. Huang X, Ling J, Wei X, Gu L. Quantitative evaluation of debris extruded apically by using ProTaper Universal Tulsa rotary system in endodontic retreatment. J Endod 2007;33:1102-5. google scholar
4. Siqueira Jr JF, Röças IN, Favieri A, Machado AG, Gahyva SM, Oliveira JC, et al. Incidence of postoperative pain after intracanal procedures based on an antimicrobial strategy. J Endod 2002;28:457-60. google scholar
5. Seltzer S, Naidorf IJ. Flare-ups in endodontics: I. Etiological factors. J Endod 2004;30:476-81. google scholar
6. Hülsmann M, Bluhm V. Efficacy, cleaning ability and safety of different rotary NiTi instruments in root canal retreatment. Int Endod J 2004;37:468-76. google scholar
7. Schirrmeister JF, Wrbas K-T, Meyer KM, Altenburger MJ, Hellwig E. Efficacy of different rotary instruments for gutta-percha removal in root canal retreatment. J Endod 2006;32:469-72. google scholar
8. Gu LS, Ling JQ, Wei X, Huang XY. Efficacy of ProTaper Universal rotary retreatment system for gutta-percha removal from root canals. Int Endod J 2008;41:288-95. google scholar

9. AlOmari T, Al-Fodeh R, Mustafa R, El-Farraj H, Khaled W, Jamleh A. Debris Extrusion Using Reciproc Blue and XP Endo Shaper Systems in Root Canal Retreatment. Int J Dent 2021:6697587. google scholar
10. Doğanay Yıldız E, Arslan H. The effect of blue thermal treatment on endodontic instruments and apical debris extrusion during retreatment procedures. Int Endod J 2019;52:1629-34. google scholar
11. Silva EJNL, Sa L, Belladonna FG, Neves AA, Accorsi-Mendonça T, Vieira VT, et al. Reciprocating versus rotary systems for root filling removal: assessment of the apically extruded material. J Endod 2014;40:2077-80. google scholar
12. Lu Y, Wang R, Zhang L, Li H, Zheng Q, Zhou X, et al. Apically extruded debris and irrigant with two N i-T i systems and hand files when removing root fillings: a laboratory study. Int Endod J 2013;46:1125-30. google scholar
13. Bürklein S, Schafer E. Apically extruded debris with reciprocating single-file and full-sequence rotary instrumentation systems. J Endod 2012;38:850-2. google scholar
14. Ersev H, Yılmaz B, Dinçol M, Dağlaroğlu R. The efficacy of ProTaper Universal rotary retreatment instrumentation to remove single gutta-percha cones cemented with several endodontic sealers. Int Endod J 2012;45:756-62. google scholar
15. Tanalp, J. A critical analysis of research methods and experimental models to study apical extrusion of debris and irrigants. Int Endod J 2022;55:153-177. google scholar
16. Gündoğar M, Özyürek T. Cyclic fatigue resistance of OneShape, HyFlex EDM, WaveOne Gold, and Reciproc Blue nickel-titanium instruments. J Endod 2017;43:1192-6. google scholar
17. De-Deus G, Silva EJNL, Vieira VTL, Belladonna FG, Elias CN, Plotino G, et al. Blue thermomechanical treatment optimizes fatigue resistance and flexibility of the Reciproc files. J Endod 2017;43:462-6. google scholar
18. Romeiro K, de Almeida A, Cassimiro M, Gominho L, Dantas E, Chagas N, et al. Reciproc and Reciproc Blue in the removal of bioceramic and resin-based sealers in retreatment procedures. Clin Oral Investig 2020;24:405-16. google scholar
19. Silva EJNL, Vieira VTL, Belladonna FG, de Siqueira Zuolo A, dos Santos Antunes H, Cavalcante DM, et al. Cyclic and torsional fatigue resistance of XP-endo Shaper and TRUShape instruments. J Endod 2018;44:168-72. google scholar
20. Azim AA, Wang HH, Tarrosh M, Azim KA, Piasecki L. Comparison between single-file rotary systems: Part 1—Efficiency, effectiveness, and adverse effects in endodontic retreatment. J Endod 2018;44:1720-4. google scholar
21. Oltra E, Cox TC, LaCourse MR, Johnson JD, Paranjpe A. Retreatability of two endodontic sealers, EndoSequence BC Sealer and AH Plus: a micro-computed tomographic comparison. Restor Dent Endod 2017;42:19-26. google scholar
22. Madhuri GV, Varri S, Bolla N, Mandava P, Akkala LS, Shaik J. Comparison of bond strength of different endodontic sealers to root dentin: An in vitro push-out test. J Conserv Dent 2016;19:461. google scholar
23. Najafzadeh R, Fazlyab M, Esnaashari E. Comparison of bioceramic and epoxy resin sealers in terms of marginal adaptation and tubular penetration depth with different obturation techniques in premolar teeth: A scanning electron microscope and confocal laser scanning microscopy study. J Family Med Prim Care 2022; 11:1794-7. google scholar
24. Schneider SW. A comparison of canal preparations in straight and curved root canals. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol 1971;32:271-5. google scholar
25. Myers GL, Montgomery S. A comparison of weights of debris extruded apically by conventional filing and Canal Master techniques. J Endod 1991;17:275-9. google scholar
26. Kaşıkçı Bilgi I, Köseler İ, Güneri P, Hülsmann M, Çalışkan M. Efficiency and apical extrusion of debris: a comparative ex vivo study of four retreatment techniques in severely curved root canals. Int Endod J 2017;50:910-8. google scholar
27. Borges ÂH, Pereira TM, Porto AN, de Araujo Estrela CR, Pedro FLM, Aranha AMF, et al. The influence of cervical preflaring on the amount of apically extruded debris after root canal preparation using different instrumentation systems. J Endod 2016;42:465-9. google scholar
28. Dincer A, Er O, Canakci B. Evaluation of apically extruded debris during root canal retreatment with several NiTi systems. Int Endod J 2015;48:1194-8. google scholar
29. Uslu G, Özyürek T, Yılmaz K, Gündoğar M, Plotino G. Apically extruded debris during root canal instrumentation with Reciproc Blue, HyFlex EDM, and XP-endo Shaper nickel-titanium files. J Endod 2018;44:856-9. google scholar
30. Azim AA, Piasecki L, da Silva Neto UX, Cruz ATG, Azim KA. XP Shaper, a novel adaptive core rotary instrument: micro-computed tomographic analysis of its shaping abilities. J Endod 2017;43:1532-8. google scholar
31. Hess D, Solomon E, Spears R, He J. Retreatability of a bioceramic root canal sealing material. J Endod 2011;37:1547-9. google scholar
32. Arias A, Azabal M, Hidalgo JJ, Jose C. Relationship between postendodontic pain, tooth diagnostic factors, and apical patency. J Endod 2009;35:189-92. google scholar
33. Özyürek T, Demiryürek EÖ. Efficacy of different nickel-titanium instruments in removing gutta-percha during root canal retreatment. J Endod 2016;42:646-9. google scholar
34. Alves FR, Paiva PL, Marceliano-Alves MF, Cabreira LJ, Lima KC, Siqueira Jr JF, et al. Bacteria and hard tissue debris extrusion and intracanal bacterial reduction promoted by XP-endo Shaper and Reciproc instruments. J Endod 2018;44:1173-8. google scholar
35. Altundasar E, Nagas E, Uyanik O, Serper A. Debris and irrigant extrusion potential of 2 rotary systems and irrigation needles. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 2011;112(4): e31-e5. google scholar
36. Tanalp J, Güngör T. Apical extrusion of debris: a literature review of an inherent occurrence during root canal treatment. Int Endod J 2014;47:211-21. google scholar
37. Elmsallati EA, Wadachi R, Suda H. Extrusion of debris after use of rotary nickel-titanium files with different pitch: a pilot study. Aust Endod J 2009;35:65-9. google scholar