We have located links that may give you full text access.
Comparison between Single-file Rotary Systems: Part 1-Efficiency, Effectiveness, and Adverse Effects in Endodontic Retreatment.
Journal of Endodontics 2018 November
INTRODUCTION: The aim of this study was to evaluate in vitro the performance of 3 single-file systems: WaveOne Gold Primary (WOG; Dentsply Sirona, Ballaigues, Switzerland), Hyflex EDM "one file" (EDM; Coltene/Whaledent, Alstatten, Switzerland), and XP Shaper (XP; FKG, La Chaux de Fonds, Switzerland), for nonsurgical endodontic retreatment on mandibular anterior teeth in regard to the amount of remaining filling material inside the canal, debris extrusion, and operation time.
METHODS: Sixty extracted standardized mandibular incisors presenting with a single oval canal were prepared to size 30.04 and obturated using warm vertical condensation. After 30 days (37°C, 100% humidity), teeth were randomly divided into 3 groups (n = 20) according to the file used for retreatment (WOG, EDM, or XP operated at 3000 rpm). During the retreatment procedures, preweighed vials were used to collect apically extruded debris, and the time required to remove the filling material was recorded in seconds. Cone-beam computed tomographic scans were taken before and after the retreatment to determine the amount of remaining filling material inside the root canal space. Statistical analysis was performed using the Kruskal-Wallis test, 1-way analysis of variance, and the Pearson test at a 5% significance level.
RESULTS: There was a statistically significant difference among the groups regarding the instrumentation time (P < .05). XP was the fastest to remove gutta-percha from the canals (40.54 ± 28.03 seconds) followed by EDM (55.77 ± 19.76 seconds) and WOG (105.92 ± 53.92 seconds). The percentage of remaining filling was significantly greater for WOG (26.65% ± 14.63%) (P < .05). No difference was found between EDM (13.51% ± 9.53%) and XP (8.60% ± 7.28%). No difference was found regarding the amount of extruded debris among the 3 groups (P > .05).
CONCLUSIONS: XP was the most efficient in gutta-percha removal from the canals when operated at a higher speed (3000 rpm) followed by EDM and WOG.
METHODS: Sixty extracted standardized mandibular incisors presenting with a single oval canal were prepared to size 30.04 and obturated using warm vertical condensation. After 30 days (37°C, 100% humidity), teeth were randomly divided into 3 groups (n = 20) according to the file used for retreatment (WOG, EDM, or XP operated at 3000 rpm). During the retreatment procedures, preweighed vials were used to collect apically extruded debris, and the time required to remove the filling material was recorded in seconds. Cone-beam computed tomographic scans were taken before and after the retreatment to determine the amount of remaining filling material inside the root canal space. Statistical analysis was performed using the Kruskal-Wallis test, 1-way analysis of variance, and the Pearson test at a 5% significance level.
RESULTS: There was a statistically significant difference among the groups regarding the instrumentation time (P < .05). XP was the fastest to remove gutta-percha from the canals (40.54 ± 28.03 seconds) followed by EDM (55.77 ± 19.76 seconds) and WOG (105.92 ± 53.92 seconds). The percentage of remaining filling was significantly greater for WOG (26.65% ± 14.63%) (P < .05). No difference was found between EDM (13.51% ± 9.53%) and XP (8.60% ± 7.28%). No difference was found regarding the amount of extruded debris among the 3 groups (P > .05).
CONCLUSIONS: XP was the most efficient in gutta-percha removal from the canals when operated at a higher speed (3000 rpm) followed by EDM and WOG.
Full text links
Related Resources
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices 
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app