Premium
Comparative study of retreatment of Thermafil and lateral condensation endodontic fillings
Author(s) -
Frajlich,
Goldberg,
Massone,
Cantarini,
Artaza
Publication year - 1998
Publication title -
international endodontic journal
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.988
H-Index - 119
eISSN - 1365-2591
pISSN - 0143-2885
DOI - 10.1046/j.1365-2591.1998.00168.x
Subject(s) - dentistry , gutta percha , materials science , root canal , significant difference , medicine
The aim of the present study was to evaluate the possibility of retreating teeth obturated with: (i) Thermafil with plastic carrier, (ii) Thermafil with metallic carrier and (iii) laterally condensed gutta‐percha. The following aspects were analysed: removal of obturation, time required for removal, remaining filling material and apical extrusion during reinstrumentation. Thirty human teeth with a single canal were instrumented up to a size 45 K‐type file, divided into three groups of 10 teeth each and obturated with Thermafil with plastic carrier (group 1), Thermafil with metallic carrier (group 2), and laterally condensed gutta‐percha (group 3) with AH26 as the sealer. Reinstrumentation was performed manually after 30 days storage using Hedstroem files and xylene as a solvent. The average time needed to remove the obturation was 12 min 1 s for group 1, 14 min 36 s for group 2 and 11 min 26 s for group 3. Although no statistically significant differences were observed between groups 1 and 2, and 1 and 3 ( P > 0.05), the differences between groups 2 and 3 were significant ( P < 0.05). The amount of remaining filling material was significantly higher in group 2 when compared with groups 1 and 2 ( P < 0.01). Although the lowest incidence of apical extrusion during reinstrumentation was found in group 3, the differences among groups were not statistically significant.