Evaluation of the Efficacy of Two Fibre-Reinforced Post Removal Techniques.

Objective: The aim of this in-vitro study was to compare the amount of material (post and luting agent) and root dentine removed using two methods for removal of endodontic posts.

Methods: Human premolar teeth (n=20) were sectioned at the CEJ and fibre reinforced posts were cemented at a length of 10mm following root canal therapy. Teeth were randomly assigned to two study groups. The methods of removal compared were: the use of RTD re-access kit (Composipost, RTD, France, St Egreve) in a conventional hand-piece driven by an electric motor (Group A); or a long tapered diamond bur (FG Diamond grit bur, Dentsply Ltd, UK) in an air-driven high speed turbine (Group B). Using micro- CT the volume of material and root dentine removed for each sample was calculated.

Results: Both the volume of material removed and the volume of root dentine removed were significantly greater when using diamond burs. (p⟨0.001). The volume of dentine removed using the diamond bur method (mean 22.64mm³) was greater than the volume removed using the reaccess kit (mean 11.71mm³).

Significance: Use of a diamond bur to remove fibre reinforced endodontic post removal poses higher risk for root perforation compared to the reaccess kit.