Comparison of Two Fiber Post Removal Techniques Evaluating Dentin Removal, Efficiency, and Heat Production

<b>Background/Objectives</b>: The removal of a fiber post (FP) during endodontic retreatment can be the source of significant complications. This study evaluated two commonly used techniques in removing a fiber post from an endodontically treated tooth by investigating three metrics: volume of dentin removed, efficiency, and temperature increase. <b>Methods</b>: Thirty extracted, single-rooted teeth were decoronated at the CEJ, then underwent endodontic treatment and post-space preparation. Fiber posts were bonded within the canal space. Teeth were pair-matched and randomly assigned to undergo post removal via Munce bur (MB) or diamond-coated ultrasonic tip (US). Teeth were scanned with micro-CT prior to post placement and after post removal. <b>Results</b>: The volume of dentin removal was not statistically significant between groups (<i>p</i> > 0.05), but the Munce bur resulted in eccentric removal patterns. There was a statistically significant difference in the time required to remove the fiber post between MB and US (<i>p</i> < 0.05). Removal of a fiber post with a Munce bur took an average of 58 s. Removal of a fiber post with an ultrasonic tip took an average of 502 s. There was no statistically significant difference in maximum temperature generated during post removal between MB and US (<i>p</i> > 0.05). <b>Conclusions</b>: Removal of a FP with a Munce bur requires significantly less time when compared to using an ultrasonic tip, with reduced risk of generating excessive heat for either technique with adequate coolant. US can stay more centered in the canal during FP removal when compared to Munce burs, potentially reducing unfavorable outcomes.