English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the efficiency of ProFile, GT, ProTaper, Race and K3 rotary instruments compared with hand K-files for removal of gutta-percha during retreatment. Sixty mandibular premolars were instrumented with GT rotary files and filled by thermomechanical compaction of gutta-percha and AH Plus sealer. The teeth are randomly divided into 6 groups of 10 specimens each. The roots were split longitudinally, digital images were created using a flatbed scanner, and the areas with remaining filling material were demarcated using Image Tool 1.21 software. The results indicate that GT left significantly less (p&lt;0.05) remaining filling material (1.18 ± 1.47) than hand (3.70 ± 3.16) and Hero instruments (2.99 ± 2.58). There was no statistically significant difference (p&lt;0.05) among the others techniques: ProFile (1.99 ± 2.66), ProTaper (2.00 ± 1.99) and K3 (2.71 ± 2.87) when compared with GT. In conclusion, GT, ProFile, ProTaper and K3 were more effective in removing gutta-percha than manual and Hero instruments.

Efficacy of five rotary systems versus manual instrumentation during endodontic retreatment