الفهرس 
introductionOnly 14 pages are availabe for public view
 |  | from | 96 |  |  |
| | | from | 96 | | |
Abstract
Summary & Conclusion Retreatment procedures in endodontic practice require complete >removal of the original root filling materials. The aim of this study was to< compare the amount of residual filling material on the walls of root canals
that was obturated with Real-Seal or gutta-percha using Reciproc or manual
files with or without solvent.
Eighty extracted single-rooted human teeth were selected and
instrumented the root canals of all teeth were prepared coronally using gatesglidden drills size 4, 3 and 2. The apical thirds were prepared with k-file #25,
30, 35 and 40 using the balanced force technique. All roots were divided into 2 equal main groups (n=40) according to
obturating material used A & B.
First group A: (n=40) the root canals was obturated using Real-Seal
obturating system according to manufacturer’s instructions.
Second group B: (n=40) the root canals were obturated using guttapercha points. A master cone # 40 taper 0.02 of gutta-percha obturating
material and Adseal resin sealer was mixed and applied to the canal walls
according to manufacturer’s instructions then lateral condensation technique
used to complete obturation.
Each group was subdivided into two subgroups according to the
method of obturation material removal:
The first subgroup of each group A1 & B1 (n=20) the obturating
material was removed using Reciproc file #40, .06 taper until removal of the
obturating material to the full working length. The second subgroup of each
group A2 & B2 (n=20) the obturating material was removed from the
coronal and middle thirds by using gates-glidden drills #4,3,2 and Hedstrom
Summary & Conclusion
74
files (H-file) for the apical third with #25,30,35,40 until the full working
length.
Each subgroup divided into two classes according to the usage of
solvent or without.
The teeth were split longitudinally. The amount of residual material of
retreatment was determined in each group at three levels in the canal.
Remnant of obturating material of the canals was evaluated using
stereomicroscope and Environmental Scanning Electron Microscopic. The
recorded data were tabulated and statistically analyzed by using Friedman
two-way ANOVA (P≤0.05).
Results revealed that, Reciproc system as retreatment instrument give
the best result than manual instruments in removing both obturating material
used (Real-Seal system & gutta-percha) and this was statistically significant.
Without using solvent give the best result than using solvent in
removing both obturating material used (Real-Seal system & gutta-percha)
and this was statistically significant.
Apical region recorded highest debris mean value followed by middle
region while the lowest mean value recorded cervically and this was
statistically significant.
The conclusion of the present study was:
1. Reciproc system was more effective than manual instruments in removal
of root canal obturating materials during endodontic retreatment.
2. No system can remove all remnants of obturating materials.
3. Real-Seal obturating system was easily removed from root canals than
gutta-percha with resin sealer.
Summary & Conclusion
75
4. Using solvents in endodontic retreatment leaves more filling material on
walls of retreated teeth than without using solvents.
Recommendations:
Further more studies required to achieve the most proper methods for
obturating materials removal