Removal of resin-based root canal filling materials with K3 rotary instruments: relative efficacy for different combinations of filling materials.

Division of Cariology, Operative Dentistry and Endodontics, Department of Oral Health Sciences, Niigata University Graduate School of Medical and Dental Sciences, 2-5274, Gakko-cho-dori, Chuo-ku, Niigata 951-8514, Japan.
Dental Materials Journal (Impact Factor: 0.81). 02/2008; 27(1):75-80. DOI: 10.4012/dmj.27.75
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Removal of resin-based root canal filling materials may cause serious problems during root canal retreatment. This study compared the working time and amount of canal enlargement when different resin-based root canal filling materials were removed with K3 rotary instruments with or without heat-softening using System B. Root canal sealer/filling point combinations tested were Epiphany/Resilon, SuperBond/Resilon, SuperBond/gutta-percha, and Canals N/gutta-percha. The materials were filled into simulated curved resin canals and removed with K3 instruments in a standardized crown-down procedure. In terms of working time, Epiphany/Resilon required a significantly longer working time than the others. However, heat application with System B significantly reduced the working time for the removal of Epiphany/Resilon. In terms of canal enlargement, there were no significant differences among the tested groups as determined with digital morphometry. It was thus concluded that Epiphany removal with K3 rotary instruments might result in extended working time, but which could be reduced with heat-softening using System B.

  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy of Mtwo, ProTaper retreatment files and Hedström files for the retreatment of root canals filled with BeeFill 2 in1 and cold lateral compaction techniques. 63 single-rooted human teeth were prepared with Mtwo rotary files to size 35/.04 and assigned into three groups (n=21/group). (1) BeeFill 2 in1/2Seal, (2) BeeFill 2 in1/AH26 and (3) laterally-compacted gutta-percha/AH26. The specimens were subgrouped according to the file system used to remove root fillings (n=7/subgroup): 1. Mtwo retreatment file, 2. ProTaper retreatment file, 3. Hedström file. Roots were split longitudinally and photographed. The time required for removal of root canal fillings and the areas of residual root filling materials were compared statistically (p<0.05). The maximum amount of remnant was observed in the Mtwo group for removal of BeeFill 2 in1/AH26. ProTaper retreatment files required less time to remove root filling material than Mtwo retreatment files and Hedström files (p<0.05). Among the tested removal systems, ProTaper retreatment files may offer the best efficiency-speed combination.
    Dental Materials Journal 11/2011; · 0.81 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: In this study, the emission characteristics of various pollutants (e.g., reduced sulfur compounds (RSCs), aldehydes, volatile organic compounds (VOCs), and organic acids) were investigated in relation to 3 food types (including cabbage, clam, and coffee seeds) and 2 cooking methods (between mild and harsh treatments). The results indicated the strongest emissions from the roasted coffee seeds out of all 6 sample types. Among the pollutant types, the maximum emissions generally came from RSCs followed by aldehydes and acids. Among VOCs, toluene and methyl ethyl ketone were emitted most prominently. As most of these pollutants also represent key odorants, their concentrations are compared through a conversion into odor intensity (OI); the results showed the RSC group as the key odorants along with aldehydes and organic acid compounds. If the sum of odor intensity (SOI) is derived for each sample, they were in the descending order: roasting coffee seeds (6.50), frying cabbage (4.52), brewing coffee (4.14), grilling clam (3.91), boiling clam (3.89), and steaming cabbage (3.21). Their concentration data were also evaluated against regulation guidelines for indoor air quality (IAQ). Comparison of these pollutant data confirms that some cooking approaches can contribute significantly to the build up of nuisance and hazardous pollution concurrently.
    Journal of hazardous materials 02/2011; 188(1-3):443-54. · 4.14 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Background and aims. An ideal root canal filling material should completely seal the entire root canal space and block communication between the root canal system and its surrounding tissues; it should also be nontoxic, noncarcinogenic, non-genotoxic, biocompatible, insoluble in tissue fluids and dimensionally stable. Bonding to dentin is a promising property, which can prevent leakage and improve the sealing ability of root canal filling materials. Resilon was developed and rec-ommended initially because the existing rootcanal filling materials did not bond to root canal dentin. Since its introduction in 2004, numerous reports have been published regarding various aspects of this material. The aim of this literature review is to present investigations regarding Resilon's physical and chemical properties and leakage studies. Materials and methods. A review of the literature was performed by using electronic and hand searching methods for Resilon from May 2004 to April 2012. Results. There are many published reports regarding Resilon. The searchshowed that Resilon is composed of a parent polymer, polycaprolactone or Tone, which is a biodegradable aliphatic polyester, with filler particles consisting of bioactive glass, bismuth oxychloride and barium sulfate. It possesses some antibacterial and antifungal properties. It is a promising material for root canal filling. Despite the presence of numerous case reports and case series regarding these applications, there are few designed research studies on clinical applications of this material. Resilon has some drawbacks such as high cost. Conclusion. Resilon seals well and is a biocompatible material. However, more clinical studies are needed to confirm its efficacy compared with other materials.
    Journal of dental research, dental clinics, dental prospects. 01/2013; 7(3):119-130.

Full-text (2 Sources)

Available from
May 27, 2014