Efficiency of reciprocating systems reciprocated at different angles in removing root-canals fillings with an MTA-type sealer: an Ex-vivo study

• Published in: BMC oral health 2022-08, Vol.22 (1), p.357-357, Article 357
• Main Authors: Madarati, Ahmad A, Sammani, Aya M N, Alnazzawi, Ahmad A, Alrahlah, Ali, Pedullà, Eugenio
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Dental Pulp Cavity; Endodontics; Ethics; Gutta-Percha; Humans; Methods; Micro-ct; MTA; Patient outcomes; Physiological aspects; Pit and fissure sealants (Dentistry); Reciprocating; Removal; Retreatment; Root Canal Filling Materials; Root Canal Obturation - methods; Root Canal Preparation - methods; Root canal therapy; Root canals; Sample size; Sealing compounds; Software
• ISSN: 1472-6831; 1472-6831
• DOI: 10.1186/s12903-022-02390-0

There have been no reports on the impact of different reciprocating angles on retreatment performance of reciprocating files. This ex-vivo study compared the efficiency of three reciprocating systems in removing MTA-type sealer-based filling materials and investigated the influence of different reciprocating angles on their retreatment ability. 140 root-canals were instrumented to a 35 apical size and filled with an MTA-type sealer and gutta-percha cones. Samples were scanned by micro-computed-tomography and the root-canals fillings volumes were measured. Samples were divided into 7 groups according to the reciprocating angles at which the WaveOne-Gold (WOG), Reciproc-Blue (RB) and R-Motion (RM) systems were reciprocated to remove the root-canals' fillings. The WOG-150/30, WOG-90/30, RB-150/30, RB-90/30, RM-150/30 and RM-90/30 groups in which the systems were reciprocated at 150/30 and 90/30 (counterclockwise/clockwise) angles. In the RB-270/30 group the RB system was reciprocated at 270/30 angles. Samples were re-scanned and the remaining filling materials' (RFMs) volumes were measured. The percentage of the RFMs volume and its mean value for each group were calculated and data were statistically analysed at 0.05 significance level. The WOG system resulted in less RFMs (2.24%) when reciprocated at 90/30 angles compared to that resulted from the 150/30 angles (4.96%) [P = 0.002]. The RB system reciprocated at 90/30 angles resulted in less RFMs (2.67%) compared to that resulted from the 270/30 angles (6.64%) [P = 0.001]. The RFMs after using RM system reciprocated at 90/30 (6.02%) and 150/30 (7.61%) were greater than those of WOG (2.24 and 4.96%) and RB (2.67 and 4.34%) reciprocated at the same angles (P