Lr. Wilcox et Jj. Juhlin, ENDODONTIC RETREATMENT OF THERMAFIL VERSUS LATERALLY CONDENSED GUTTA-PERCHA, Journal of endodontics, 20(3), 1994, pp. 115-117
The Thermafil device is becoming a popular obturating material. Becaus
e endodontic failures inevitably occur with all techniques, questions
of retreatment of Thermafil-obturated teeth will also arise. The purpo
se of this study was to compare retreatment of Thermafil and laterally
condensed gutta-percha. Thirty-five mandibular incisors were prepared
with a stepback flare technique and divided into two groups. One grou
p (n = 20) was obturated using Thermafil, the other group (n = 15) was
obturated with laterally condensed gutta-percha. The teeth were store
d in a humidor for 3 months to allow sealer to set. Retreatment of bot
h groups was accomplished using a combination of heat and chloroform s
olvent. The time for retreatment was recorded. The teeth were split lo
ngitudinally and the amount of gutta-percha remaining in the root cana
l was measured and analyzed statistically. The results showed that in
the coronal one-third of the canal, use of the Thermafil device result
ed in significantly more remaining gutta-percha than use of laterally
condensed gutta-percha. However, in the apical and middle one-third of
the canal the difference in remaining gutta-percha between Thermafil
and laterally condensed gutta-percha was not significant. The metal ca
rrier was easily removed and the mean time for retreatment was 6.3 min
for Thermafil compared with 5.7 min in the lateral condensation group
.