Retreatability of Endosequence® BCS™ Hiflow Utilizing Both Chloroform and An Aqueous Solution
Dijana Elmejdoubi DDS; MS1*, Thomas E. Lallier, PhD2, Masyn Cameron, DDS3, Albert F. McMullen III, DDS; FACD4
1 Olympic Endo, PLLC, Colorado Springs, CO, USA.
2 Assistant Director, Center of Excellence in Oral and Craniofacial Biology, Louisiana State University School of Dentistry; New Orleans, LA, USA.
3 Louisiana State University School of Dentistry; New Orleans, LA, USA.
4 Department Head and Post Graduate Director, Department of Endodontics, Louisiana State University School of Dentistry; New Orleans, LA, USA.
*Corresponding Author: Dr. Elmejdoubi Dijana DDS; MS, Endodontist, Louisiana State University School of Dentistry; New Orleans, LA, USA.
https://doi.org/10.58624/SVOADE.2025.06.001
Received: December 11, 2024
Published: January 07, 2025
Citation: Elmejdoubi D, Lallier TE, Cameron M, McMullen. AF. Retreatability of Endosequence® BCS™ Hiflow Utilizing Both Chloroform and An Aqueous Solution. SVOA Dentistry 2025, 6:1, 01-06. doi: 10.58624/SVOADE.2025.06.001
Abstract
Purpose: When RCT fails, retreatment of the case usually requires removal of the previous root canal fill (RCF). The aim of our research was to evaluate the retreatability of a root canal initially filled with gutta percha and EndoSequence® BCS™ HiFlow utilizing chloroform followed by 18% HCl, 18% HCl alone, chloroform alone or saline solution.
Methods: 40 extracted single canal teeth were decoronated and obturated utilizing a single cone gutta percha technique and Endosequence BCS, stored one week in an incubator, and then we attempted to remove the previous RCF. Teeth were divided in 4 different groups (n=10). Canals were then cleaned using heat, rotary instruments, hand files and specific solutions. Group A - cleaned by using only saline solution, Group B - cleaned by using only chloroform solution, Group C - cleaned by using only 18% HCl solution, and Group D - cleaned by using chloroform + 18% HCl. Image J software was used to evaluate and quantify the amount of obturation material left in the canal after cleaning of the canals.
Results: The pairwise comparison showed no significant difference between chloroform used alone and 18% HCl used alone (P = 0.82). However, chloroform + 18%HCl treatment showed a significant difference between chloroform alone (P = 0.026), 18% HCl alone (P = 0.021), and saline alone (0.003).
Conclusion: The result of this study indicates that chloroform followed by 18% HCl was superior in removing the previous RCF Compared to the individual solutions used alone in canals filled with gutta-percha and BCS. However, regardless of the solution used, patency could be achieved.
Keywords: Nonsurgical Endodontic Treatment; Chloroform; Root Canal Fill (RCF)
