| Article ID | Journal | Published Year | Pages | File Type |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 3167802 | Oral Surgery, Oral Medicine, Oral Pathology, Oral Radiology, and Endodontology | 2009 | 5 Pages |
ObjectiveThe aim of this study was to compare Profile .04 taper series 29 instruments and hand files for gutta-percha removal.Study designTwenty maxillary central incisors with a single straight canal were instrumented and filled. The teeth were divided into 2 groups of 10 specimens each, according to gutta-percha removal techniques: Group 1- Profile series 29 and Group 2- hand files and solvent. The amount of time for gutta-percha removal and the number of fractured instruments were evaluated. Radiographs were taken and the teeth were grooved longitudinally and split. The area of residual debris was measured using computer software.ResultsThe time for filling material removal was significantly shorter when Profile series 29 was used (P = .00). Regarding cleanliness, there were no statistical differences in the teeth halves evaluations (P > .05). Hand instruments cleaned the canals significantly better than Profiles, in the radiographic analysis considering the whole canal. Overall, the radiographic analysis showed a smaller percentage of residual debris than the teeth halves analysis.ConclusionThe Profile series 29 instruments proved to be faster than hand instruments in removing root filling materials; however, hand instruments yielded better root canal cleanliness. Some residual debris was not visualized by radiographs.
