1PG Student, Department of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, Himachal Institute of Dental Sciences, Paonta Sahib, India
2Professor & Head, Department of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, Himachal Institute of Dental Sciences, Paonta Sahib, India
3Professor, Department of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, Himachal Institute of Dental Sciences, Paonta Sahib, India
*Corresponding Author: Kaustubh Bhardwaj, PG Student, Department of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, Himachal Institute of Dental Sciences, Paonta Sahib, India, Email: kaustubhbhardwaj30@gmail.com
Online published on 29 February, 2024.
Comparative evaluation of different rotary retreatment instruments using Protaper Universal, Mtwo retreatment, and Hyflex remover in removing root canal filling material.
1. To evaluate the efficacy of different rotary instruments in removal of filling material. 2. Time taken by each system in complete removal.
Although the volume of filling material decreased significantly in all three groups (P>0.05), none of the systems removed the material completely: Group 1 (Protaper Universal) performed the best at removing the root canal filling material in Coronal and middle third of root canal while Group 2 performed best in the apical third. Group 3 (Hyflex remover) took the least time for removal as compared to others.
Protaper Universal Retreatment file system removed the gutta percha more efficiently than the hyflex remover and M two Re-treatment files. The least time was consumed by HyflexRemover for removing Gutta percha than the other two systems.
Retreatment, Protaper Universal, Hyflex Remover, M Two, Ni-Ti Rotary, Stereomicroscope
