Comparison of Efficacy of ProTaper Universal Rotary Retreatment Files and Mtwo Retreatment Files in the Removal of Gutta-Percha in Single-Rooted Premolars during Root Canal Retreatment

Jaweria  Habib; Shakeel Ur Rehman  Khattak; Sana  Zakir; Saba Ajmeer  Khan; Rooba Azmat  Ullah

doi:10.54112/bcsrj.v6i5.2014

Authors

Jaweria Habib Department of Operative Dentistry and Endodontics at Sardar Begum Dental College, Peshawar, Pakistan
Shakeel Ur Rehman Khattak Department of Operative Dentistry and Endodontics at Sardar Begum Dental College, Peshawar, Pakistan
Sana Zakir Department of Operative Dentistry and Endodontics at Sardar Begum Dental College, Peshawar, Pakistan
Saba Ajmeer Khan Department of Operative Dentistry and Endodontics at Sardar Begum Dental College, Peshawar, Pakistan
Rooba Azmat Ullah Department of Operative Dentistry and Endodontics at Sardar Begum Dental College, Peshawar, Pakistan

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.54112/bcsrj.v6i5.2014

Keywords:

Cone-Beam Computed Tomography; Endodontics; Gutta-Percha; MTWO Retreatment Files; ProTaper Retreatment Files; Root Canal Therapy

Abstract

Root canal treatment is an essential procedure to preserve infected teeth; however, approximately 8.2% of cases require retreatment due to persistent microbial infection. Rotary endodontic systems such as Mtwo® and ProTaper-D® have been developed to enhance the efficiency and safety of gutta-percha removal during re-endodontic therapy. Objective: To compare the efficacy of Mtwo® and ProTaper-D® retreatment file systems in removing gutta-percha and the time required for canal cleaning in endodontically treated mandibular premolars. Methods: A laboratory-based experimental study was conducted on 320 extracted mandibular premolars that were obturated and randomly divided into two groups: Mtwo® and ProTaper-D® retreatment systems. After chloroform-assisted softening, gutta-percha was removed using the respective rotary files. Cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) was used to assess the volume of residual filling material, and cleaning time was recorded in seconds. Data normality was confirmed using the Shapiro–Wilk test, and comparisons were made using paired t-tests, with a significance level set at p < 0.05. Ethical approval was obtained before study initiation. Results: Among 320 specimens, the mean residual gutta-percha volume was 41.43 ± 6.17 mm³ in the Mtwo® group and 36.90 ± 6.01 mm³ in the ProTaper-D® group. The mean cleaning time was 236.76 ± 16.53 s for Mtwo® and 278.15 ± 17.69 s for ProTaper-D®. Statistically significant differences (p = 0.000) were observed for both residual material and cleaning time, indicating that the ProTaper-D® system achieved more effective cleaning but required a longer time compared to Mtwo®. Conclusion: Neither Mtwo® nor ProTaper-D® retreatment systems completely removed gutta-percha from root canals. Although ProTaper-D® demonstrated superior cleaning efficacy, it required more time to complete the procedure. Both systems showed comparable overall performance and can be used effectively in endodontic retreatment.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Zheng J, Wu Z, Niu K, Xie Y, Hu X, Fu J, et al. Microbiome of deep dentinal caries from reversible pulpitis to irreversible pulpitis. J Endod. 2019;45(3):302–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2018.11.017

Sun C, Xie Y, Hu X, Fu J, Zhou J, Wu L. Relationship between clinical symptoms and the microbiota in advanced caries. J Endod. 2020;46(6):763–70. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2020.03.006

Estrela C, Holland R, Estrela CR de A, Alencar AHG, Sousa-Neto MD, Pécora JD. Characterization of successful root canal treatment. Braz Dent J. 2014;25(1):3–11. https://doi.org/10.1590/0103-6440201302356

León-López M, Cabanillas-Balsera D, Martín-González J, Montero-Miralles P, Saúco-Márquez JJ, Segura-Egea JJ. Prevalence of root canal treatment worldwide: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Int Endod J. 2022;55(11):1105–27. https://doi.org/10.1111/iej.13822

Castañeda ZCG, Garza HV, Alanis HFM, Reyes AL, Huitron PL, Sánchez-Najera RI, et al. Microorganisms in persistent apical periodontitis: A review. Int J Appl Dent Sci. 2021;7(3):369–73. https://doi.org/10.22271/oral.2021.v7.i3f.1323

Aljabri M, Kensara J, Mandorah A, Sunbul M. Causes of root canal treatment failure: A prospective study in Makkah City, Saudi Arabia. Saudi J Oral Sci. 2020;7(1):40. https://doi.org/10.4103/sjos.SJOralSci_35_19

Estrela C, Pécora JD, Estrela CR, Guedes OA, Silva BS, Soares CJ, et al. Common operative procedural errors and clinical factors associated with root canal treatment. Braz Dent J. 2017;28(2):179–90. https://doi.org/10.1590/0103-6440201702451

Purba R, Sonarkar SS, Podar R, Singh S, Babel S, Kulkarni G. Comparative evaluation of retreatment techniques by using different file systems from oval-shaped canals. J Conserv Dent. 2020;23(1):91–6. https://doi.org/10.4103/JCD.JCD_167_20

Khedmat S, Azari A, Shamshiri AR, Fadae M, Bashizadeh Fakhar H. Efficacy of ProTaper and Mtwo Retreatment Files in removal of gutta-percha and GuttaFlow from root canals. Iran Endod J. 2016;11(3):184–7. https://doi.org/10.7508/iej.2016.03.007

Aly A, Abdallah A, El Backly R. Efficacy of three different retreatment file systems for gutta-percha removal using cone-beam computed tomography. Alex Dent J. 2020;[published online]. https://doi.org/10.21608/adjalexu.2020.122738

Schirrmeister JF, Wrbas KT, Meyer KM, Altenburger MJ, Hellwig E. Efficacy of different rotary instruments for gutta-percha removal in root canal retreatment. J Endod. 2006;32(5):469–72. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2005.10.052

Ozlek E, Neelakantan P, Khan K, Cheung GSP, Rossi-Fedele G. Debris extrusion during root canal preparation with nickel-titanium instruments using liquid and gel formulations of sodium hypochlorite in vitro. Aust Endod J. 2021;47(2):130–6. https://doi.org/10.1111/aej.12424

Giuliani V, Cocchetti R, Pagavino G. Efficacy of ProTaper Universal Retreatment Files in removing filling materials during root canal retreatment. J Endod. 2008;34(11):1381–4. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2008.08.002

Madarati AA, Al-Nazzawi AA, Sammani AMN, Alkayyal MA. The efficacy of retreatment and new reciprocating systems in removing a gutta-percha-based filling material. J Taibah Univ Med Sci. 2018;13(5):452–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtumed.2018.03.011

Chudasama KD, Chokshi S, Sanghvi Z, Patel N, Vaidya N, Chhaya D. Comparative evaluation of the efficacy of ProTaper and Mtwo rotary retreatment system and conventional hand H-files for removal of gutta-percha from root canal—A stereomicroscopic study. Indian J Dent Res. 2024;35(2):206–10. https://doi.org/10.4103/ijdr.ijdr_145_23

Bramante CM, Fidelis NS, Assumpção TS, Bernardineli N, Garcia RB, Bramante AS, et al. Heat release, time required, and cleaning ability of MTwo R and ProTaper Universal Retreatment systems in the removal of filling material. J Endod. 2010;36(11):1870–3. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2010.08.013

Rani P, Sharma P, Singh I, Sinha DJ, Bedi K, Swapnil F. Evaluation of fracture resistance of endodontically treated teeth after retreatment with different retreatment file systems: An in vitro CBCT study. World J Dent. 2023;14(9):809–14. https://doi.org/10.5005/jp-journals-10015-2282

Jaiswal KR, Meenal G, Akolkar K, Roshan S, Kolhe S, Aher G. Efficacy of three retreatment systems, Mtwo, ProTaper-R, and R-Endo, in removing gutta-percha from root canal as compared to manual instrumentation: An in vitro study. J Int Oral Health. 2015;7(11):80–3.