Reciprocating Versus Rotary Systems for Root Filling Removal: Assessment of the Apically Extruded Material

-Until now, no study assessed debris extrusion after endodontic retreatment with reciprocating systems.-Reciprocating systems were associated with less debris extrusion when compared with conventional rotary retreatment system.

IntroductionThis study was designed to quantitatively evaluate the amount of apically extruded debris by comparing the ProTaper Universal Retreatment system (Dentsply Maillefer, Ballaigues, Switzerland) with 2 reciprocating single-file systems (Reciproc [VDW, Munich, Germany] and WaveOne [Dentsply Maillefer]) during endodontic retreatment.MethodsForty-five mandibular premolars with a single canal were prepared with the ProTaper Universal system and then obturated. The specimens were divided into 3 groups (n = 15) according to the system used for filling removal: ProTaper Universal Retreatment system associated with the ProTaper Universal system (until file F4 40/0.06]), Reciproc system (Reciproc R40 [40/0.06]), and WaveOne system (WaveOne Large [40/0.08]). Sodium hypochlorite was used as an irrigant, and the apically extruded debris was collected in glass vials and then dried. The mean weight of debris was assessed with a microbalance and statistically analyzed using 1-way analysis of variance and post hoc Tukey multiple comparison tests (P < .05).ResultsThe ProTaper Universal Retreatment system produced significantly more debris compared with the Reciproc and WaveOne systems (P < .01). The reciprocating systems showed no significant difference between them (P > .05).ConclusionsUnder the conditions of the present study, all systems caused apical debris extrusion. Reciprocating systems were associated with less debris extrusion when compared with a conventional rotary retreatment system.