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

Page Start
Page End
  • Abdulrahman AlShabib
  • Stephen Brindley
  • Julian Satterthwaite


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.

Post and Core
Dental Post
Dental Post Removal