dc.creatorBRAMANTE, Clovis Monteiro
dc.creatorFIDELIS, Natasha Siqueira
dc.creatorASSUMPCAO, Tatiana Santos
dc.creatorBERNARDINELI, Norberti
dc.creatorGARCIA, Roberto Brandao
dc.creatorBRAMANTE, Alexandre Silva
dc.creatorMORAES, Ivaldo Gomes de
dc.date.accessioned2012-10-20T00:54:15Z
dc.date.accessioned2018-07-04T15:24:29Z
dc.date.available2012-10-20T00:54:15Z
dc.date.available2018-07-04T15:24:29Z
dc.date.created2012-10-20T00:54:15Z
dc.date.issued2010
dc.identifierJOURNAL OF ENDODONTICS, v.36, n.11, p.1870-1873, 2010
dc.identifier0099-2399
dc.identifierhttp://producao.usp.br/handle/BDPI/25911
dc.identifier10.1016/j.joen.2010.08.013
dc.identifierhttp://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2010.08.013
dc.identifier.urihttp://repositorioslatinoamericanos.uchile.cl/handle/2250/1622576
dc.description.abstractIntroduction: This ex vivo study evaluated the heat release, time required, and cleaning efficacy of MTwo (VDW, Munich, Germany) and ProTaper Universal Retreatment systems (Dentsply/Maillefer, Ballaigues, Switzerland) and hand instrumentation in the removal of filling material. Methods: Sixty single-rooted human teeth with a single straight canal were obturated with gutta-percha and zinc oxide and eugenol-based cement and randomly allocated to 3 groups (n = 20). After 30-day storage at 37 degrees C and 100% humidity, the root fillings were removed using ProTaper UR, MTwo R, or hand files. Heat release, time required, and cleaning efficacy data were analyzed statistically (analysis of variance and the Tukey test, alpha = 0.05). Results: None of the techniques removed the root fillings completely. Filling material removal with ProTaper UR was faster but caused more heat release. Mtwo R produced less heat release than the other techniques but was the least efficient in removing gutta-percha/sealer. Conclusions: ProTaper UR and MTwo R caused the greatest and lowest temperature increase on root surface, respectively; regardless of the type of instrument, more heat was released in the cervical third. Pro Taper UR needed less time to remove fillings than MTwo R. All techniques left filling debris in the root canals. (I Endod 2010;36:1870-1873)
dc.languageeng
dc.publisherELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
dc.relationJournal of Endodontics
dc.rightsCopyright ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
dc.rightsrestrictedAccess
dc.subjectEndodontic retreatment
dc.subjectgutta-percha removal
dc.subjectMtwo Retreatment
dc.subjectProTaper Universal Retreatment
dc.titleHeat Release, Time Required, and Cleaning Ability of Mtwo R and ProTaper Universal Retreatment Systems in the Removal of Filling Material
dc.typeArtículos de revistas


Este ítem pertenece a la siguiente institución