TY - JOUR
T1 - Novel electromagnetic device to retrieve fractured stainless steel endodontic files
T2 - an in-vitro investigation
AU - Alhumaidi, Ashraf Mohammed
AU - Mirza, Mubashir Baig
AU - Alelyani, Ahmed A.
AU - Almnea, Raid A.
AU - Shaiban, Amal S.
AU - Altuwalah, Ahmed
AU - Alroomy, Riyadh
AU - Al Malwi, Ahmed Abdullah
AU - Jabali, Ahmad
AU - Al Moaleem, Mohammed M.
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© The Author(s) 2025.
PY - 2025/12
Y1 - 2025/12
N2 - Background: Fractured endodontic files hinder root canal treatment. This study aimed to assess the retrieval of fractured stainless-steel (SS) endodontic files from different thirds of root canals using a novel electromagnetic device and compare its effectiveness to the ultrasonic Terauchi File Removal Kit (TFRK). Methods: 180 decoronated single-rooted anterior teeth were divided into four experimental groups (A–D) and one control group (n = 36 each). SS K-files size 15 were fractured in groups A and C, and size 25 in groups B and D at various canal levels. Retrieval in groups A and B used an electromagnetic device; groups C and D used TFRK. In the control group, size 15 Nickel-titanium K-files were used. Retrieval success rates were compared using the Chi-square test, while retrieval times were analyzed using Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) and Tukey’s HSD post hoc test (P ≤ 0.05). Results: Electromagnetic device retrieved all files from the coronal third, while lower rates were noted in the middle and apical thirds. The TFRK retrieved all files in the coronal and middle thirds, with fewer retrieved apically. When comparing the two devices, the TFRK demonstrated significantly higher retrieval rates than the electromagnetic device in both the middle third (P = 0.010) and the apical third (P = 0.018). Retrieval times ranged from 2.81 to 11.76 mins for the electromagnetic device and 1–5.72 mins for TFRK, increasing with canal depth. TFRK was faster apically, though overall time differences were not significant. Analysis of variance (ANOVA) showed significant differences in retrieval times among groups, confirmed by the Tukey HSD post hoc test. Conclusions: Although the electromagnetic device was comparable in removing SS files from coronal third within optimal time, TFRK remains more clinically viable for middle/apical retrievals.
AB - Background: Fractured endodontic files hinder root canal treatment. This study aimed to assess the retrieval of fractured stainless-steel (SS) endodontic files from different thirds of root canals using a novel electromagnetic device and compare its effectiveness to the ultrasonic Terauchi File Removal Kit (TFRK). Methods: 180 decoronated single-rooted anterior teeth were divided into four experimental groups (A–D) and one control group (n = 36 each). SS K-files size 15 were fractured in groups A and C, and size 25 in groups B and D at various canal levels. Retrieval in groups A and B used an electromagnetic device; groups C and D used TFRK. In the control group, size 15 Nickel-titanium K-files were used. Retrieval success rates were compared using the Chi-square test, while retrieval times were analyzed using Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) and Tukey’s HSD post hoc test (P ≤ 0.05). Results: Electromagnetic device retrieved all files from the coronal third, while lower rates were noted in the middle and apical thirds. The TFRK retrieved all files in the coronal and middle thirds, with fewer retrieved apically. When comparing the two devices, the TFRK demonstrated significantly higher retrieval rates than the electromagnetic device in both the middle third (P = 0.010) and the apical third (P = 0.018). Retrieval times ranged from 2.81 to 11.76 mins for the electromagnetic device and 1–5.72 mins for TFRK, increasing with canal depth. TFRK was faster apically, though overall time differences were not significant. Analysis of variance (ANOVA) showed significant differences in retrieval times among groups, confirmed by the Tukey HSD post hoc test. Conclusions: Although the electromagnetic device was comparable in removing SS files from coronal third within optimal time, TFRK remains more clinically viable for middle/apical retrievals.
KW - Electromagnetic device
KW - Fractured endodontic instrument
KW - Instrument retrieval
KW - Root canal treatment
KW - Stainless steel
UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/105014936153
U2 - 10.1186/s12903-025-06793-7
DO - 10.1186/s12903-025-06793-7
M3 - Article
C2 - 40887576
AN - SCOPUS:105014936153
SN - 1472-6831
VL - 25
JO - BMC Oral Health
JF - BMC Oral Health
IS - 1
M1 - 1388
ER -