Heat Release, Time Required, and Cleaning Ability of Mtwo R and ProTaper Universal Retreatment Systems in the Removal of Filling Material

IntroductionThis ex vivo study evaluated the heat release, time required, and cleaning efficacy of MTwo (VDW, Munich, Germany) and ProTaper Universal Retreatment systems (Dentsply/Maillefer, Ballaigues, Switzerland) and hand instrumentation in the removal of filling material.MethodsSixty single-rooted human teeth with a single straight canal were obturated with gutta-percha and zinc oxide and eugenol-based cement and randomly allocated to 3 groups (n = 20). After 30-day storage at 37°C and 100% humidity, the root fillings were removed using ProTaper UR, MTwo R, or hand files. Heat release, time required, and cleaning efficacy data were analyzed statistically (analysis of variance and the Tukey test, α = 0.05).ResultsNone of the techniques removed the root fillings completely. Filling material removal with ProTaper UR was faster but caused more heat release. Mtwo R produced less heat release than the other techniques but was the least efficient in removing gutta-percha/sealer.ConclusionsProTaper UR and MTwo R caused the greatest and lowest temperature increase on root surface, respectively; regardless of the type of instrument, more heat was released in the cervical third. Pro Taper UR needed less time to remove fillings than MTwo R. All techniques left filling debris in the root canals.