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 Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of Twisted File (TF) Adaptive, Reciproc, and ProTaper Universal Retreatment (UR) System instruments for removing root-canal-filling. Sixty single rooted teeth were decoronated, instrumented and obturated. Preoperative CBCT scans were taken and the teeth were retreated with TF Adaptive, Reciproc, ProTaper UR, or hand files (n=15). Then, the teeth were rescanned, and the percentage volume of the residual root-canal-filling material was established. The total time for retreatment was recorded, and the data was statistically analyzed. The statistical ranking of the residual filling material volume was as follows: hand file=TF Adaptive&gt;ProTaper UR=Reciproc. The ProTaper UR and Reciproc systems required shorter periods of time for retreatment. Root canal filling was more efficiently removed by using Reciproc and ProTaper UR instruments than TF Adaptive instruments and hand files. The TF Adaptive system was advantageous over hand files with regard to operating time.

dental materials journal

Efficacy of Twisted File Adaptive, Reciproc and ProTaper Universal Retreatment instruments for root-canal-filling removal: A cone-beam computed tomography study