Related Experiment Video
Updated: Mar 28, 2026

Scanning Electron Microscopic Evaluation of Surface Defects of Remover Retreatment File After Single and Multiple Uses
Published on: October 11, 2024
IS GUTTACORE MORE EASILY REMOVED FROM THE ROOT CANAL THAN THERMAFIL? AN EX-VIVO STUDY
Giselle Nevares1, Diana Santana de Albuquerque, Carlos Eduardo da Silveira Bueno
1University of Pernambuco, Avenida Gal Newton Cavalcanti, Tabatinga, Camaragibe, PE, Brazil.
Abstract:
GuttaCore is a new cross-linked gutta-percha carrier. Its handling time and ease of removal were compared with those of a plastic carrier (Thermafil) and the continuous wave of condensation technique (control). Forty-five maxillary central incisors were randomly divided 3 groups according to filling technique and retreatment was carried out in all samples with NiTi rotary files, hand files and ultrasonic inserts. Time required for filling removal was recorded. Roots were then split longitudinally and photographed under 5x magnification, and residual filling material was quantified. Removal time was significantly longer for Thermafil (7.10 minutes) than GuttaCore (2.91 minutes) and the control group (1.93 minutes) (p < 0.001). The amount of residual filling material did not differ among the groups: Thermafil 8.31%, GuttaCore 6.27 and control 8.68% (p > 0.05). In conclusion, replacing plastic core with cross-linked gutta-percha allows easier removal of carrier from the root canal. The remnants of filling material in all samples illustrate that retreatment remains a challenge in endodontics.

