Evaluation of Er,Cr:YSGG laser technique for fiber post removal of endodontically treated teeth using micro-computed tomography

Removal Efficiency and Effectiveness of Four Different Fiber Posts Using Five Different Drill Systems in Multirooted Teeth

AIM

In comparing the effectiveness and efficiency of different types of post removal systems in removing different types of fiber posts (FPs), this study aims to shed light on the success of removal by currently available drill systems.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A total of 200 maxillary first molars, were root canal treated and prepared to receive posts. The molars were divided into four groups corresponding to four different FPs: Group RX, Radix FP; Group RF, Reforpost Glass Fiber; Group HI; Hi-Rem Endodontic Post; and Group DT, D.T. Light-Post Illusion X-RO. Fiber posts were done with luting by Gradia Core (GC America, Inc.). Groups were again divided into five subgroups corresponding to the technique by which the FP was removed into as follows: Subgroup P, PD-25-1.1 Drill; subgroup G, GC FP Drill; subgroup E, EasyPost Precision Drill; subgroup R, Reaccess Carbide Double Taper Kit; and subgroup H; H-Endodontic Drill. After posts were removed, effectiveness and efficiency were documented. Data were tabulated and statistically analyzed.

RESULTS

Strong significant differences regarding efficiency among groups (FP type) and subgroups (drills used) (p = 0.00) were shown by the one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) test. Subgroup DT-G scored the longest mean removal time (20.9 minutes) while Subgroup RX-R scored the shortest mean removal time (1.4 minutes) Regarding effectiveness, strong significant differences among groups (p = 0.00) and subgroups (p = 0.00) were shown by one-way ANOVA. Subgroup RF-G scored the highest scale (5.2) whereas subgroup HI-R scored the lowest mean scale (1.2).

CONCLUSION

The difference was strongly significant between tested post-removal kits and between tested FPs. Re-access Carbide Double Taper Kit performed superiorly in both effectiveness and efficiency, followed by PD-25-1.1 Drill. Hi-Rem post showed the best retrieving results among other FPs.

CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE

Knowing the best technique and tools for post removal could spare the practitioner any unwanted complications during post removal. How to cite this article: Sayed M, Alahmad AM, Alhajji KS, et al. Removal Efficiency and Effectiveness of Four Different Fiber Posts Using Five Different Drill Systems in Multirooted Teeth. J Contemp Dent Pract 2024;25(1):72-78.

Micro-CT evaluation of the removal of root fillings using rotary and reciprocating systems supplemented by XP-Endo Finisher, the Self-Adjusting File, or Er,Cr:YSGG laser

Objectives

This study aimed to compare the effectiveness of a single-file reciprocating system (WaveOne Gold, WOG) and a multi-file rotary system (ProTaper Universal Retreatment, PTUR) in removing canal filling from severely curved canals and to evaluate the possible adjunctive effects of XP-Endo Finisher (XPF), the Self-Adjusting File (SAF), and an erbium, chromium: yttrium, scandium, gallium garnet (Er,Cr:YSGG) laser using micro-computed tomography (μCT).

Materials and Methods

Sixty-six curved mandibular molars were divided into 2 groups based on the retreatment technique and then into 3 based on the supplementary method. The residual filling volumes and root canals were evaluated with μCT before and after retreatment, and after the supplementary steps. The data were statistically analyzed with the t-test, Mann-Whitney U test, analysis of covariance, and factorial analysis of variance (p < 0.05).

Results

PTUR and WOG showed no significant difference in removing filling materials (p > 0.05). The supplementary techniques were significantly more effective than reciprocating or rotary systems only (p < 0.01). The supplementary steps showed no significant differences in canal filling removal effectiveness (p > 0.05), but XPF showed less dentin reduction than the SAF and Er,Cr:YSGG laser (p < 0.01).

Conclusions

The supplementary methods significantly decreased the volume of residual filling materials. XPF caused minimal changes in root canal volume and might be preferred for retreatment in curved root canals. Supplementary approaches after retreatment procedures may improve root canal cleanliness.