Related Experiment Video
Updated: Aug 24, 2026

Effects of Mechanical Methods Used in Peri-implantitis Treatment on Implant Surface Decontamination and Roughness
Published on: March 14, 2025
Efficacy, cleaning ability and safety of different rotary NiTi instruments in root canal retreatment
1Department of Operative Dentistry, Preventive Dentistry and Periodontology, University of Göttingen, Göttingen, Germany. michael.huelsmann@med.uni-goettingen.de
Aim:
To evaluate the efficacy, cleaning ability and safety of three different rotary nickel-titanium instruments with and without a solvent (eucalyptol) versus hand files in the removal of gutta-percha root fillings.
Methodology:
Eighty extracted single-rooted anterior teeth were enlarged to size 35 and obturated with laterally condensed gutta-percha using AHPlus as the sealer. Removal of gutta-percha was performed with the following devices and techniques: FlexMaster, GT Rotary, ProTaper and Hedström files. All techniques were used with and without the solvent eucalyptol. The following data were recorded: time taken to reach the calculated working length and time required for the removal of gutta-percha. The teeth were split longitudinally and photographed. Cleanliness of the root canal walls was scored using the projected slides with a total magnification of approximately 70x. Statistical analysis was performed using the two-way anova (P < 0.001) for the analysis of working time.
Results:
The technique that reached the working length most rapidly was that using ProTaper instruments and eucalyptol (+E), followed by FlexMaster + E, ProTaper, FlexMaster, Hedström files + E, GT Rotary + E, Hedström files, and GT Rotary. No significant differences were found for retreatment with or without a solvent in all groups. ProTaper and FlexMaster worked significantly more rapidly than Hedström files and GT Rotary (anova, P < 0.001). Time for complete removal of gutta-percha was again shortest with ProTaper + E, followed by FlexMaster + E, ProTaper, FlexMaster, GT Rotary + E, Hedström files + E, Hedström files, and GT Rotary. ProTaper and FlexMaster again worked significantly faster than the other techniques (anova, P < 0.001). There was no visible filling material extruded apically. Root canal cleanliness proved best following the use of FlexMaster + E, and Hedström files + E, followed by ProTaper + E, and GT Rotary + E.
Conclusion:
Under the experimental conditions, FlexMaster and ProTaper NiTi instruments proved to be efficient and time-saving devices for the removal of gutta-percha. The use of eucalyptol as a solvent shortened the time to reach the working length and to remove the gutta-percha, but this was not significant.
Related Concept Videos
Hand hygiene
Hand washing...
Antimicrobial Effectiveness
Methods of Sterilization II: Chemical Methods
Using chemical sterilization rather than heat to clean out equipment is recommended. It eradicates and removes all bacteria,...
Cleaning, Sterilization, and Disinfection
Cleaning
The cleaning process usually involves using water with detergents or enzymatic cleaner and removing foreign material from objects and surfaces, including organic material such as body fluids or inorganic material like soil. Cleaning is performed before high-level disinfection and sterilization because foreign materials on the cover of the devices interfere with process...