Akademik Veri Yönetim Sistemi
European Oral Research, cilt.60, sa.1, ss.79-85, 2026 (ESCI, Scopus, TRDizin)
Purpose The aim of this study was to investigate the efficacy of ultrasonic, laser, and XP-Endo Finisher activation techniques for the removal of GuttaFlow Bioseal from root canals. Materials and Methods In this study, 64 extracted mandibular premolar teeth were instrumented using ProTaper Next files up to size X3 and randomly divided into two groups (n = 32) based on the obturation method: Group 1 — GuttaFlow Bioseal with gutta-percha, and Group 2 — GuttaFlow Bioseal without gutta-percha. After root filling removal, the specimens were randomly allocated into one of four activation subgroups (n = 8): Subgroup A — Conventional Needle Irrigation; Subgroup B — Passive Ultrasonic Activation; Subgroup C — XP-Endo Finisher; and Subgroup D — Er, Cr: YSGG Laser. The teeth were then sectioned longitudinally, and photographic images were captured under a stereomicroscope. Residual filling materials in the coronal, middle, and apical thirds were measured using ImageJ software. Data were statistically analyzed with three-way ANOVA and Tukey’s HSD test (p < 0.05). Results The lowest amount of residual filling material was observed in the Er, Cr: YSGG laser group, followed by the XP-Endo Finisher, passive ultrasonic activation, and conventional needle irrigation groups, respectively (p < 0.001). There was no statistically significant difference in retreatability between GuttaFlow Bioseal used with or without gutta-percha (p = 0.754). Conclusion This study demonstrates that different activation techniques significantly improve the removal of GuttaFlow Bioseal from root canals; however, none achieved complete removal. Among the tested methods, the Er, Cr: YSGG laser was the most effective, followed by the XP-Endo Finisher and passive ultrasonic activation. These results suggest that the Er, Cr: YSGG laser is a highly effective option for endodontic retreatment.