Determining the Optimal Length of Root Canal Obturations Using GuttaFlow®2 and Thermafill Systems.

Introduction: Successful endodontic therapy requires complete mechanical and chemical preparation of the root canal system, followed by three-dimensional obturation. Inadequate obturation, despite proper cleaning and shaping, may lead to treatment failure. This study aims to compare the obturation length achieved using the GuttaFlow®2 and Thermafill systems, evaluating their effectiveness through micro-computed tomography (micro-CT). Materials and Methods: Eighty extracted human anterior teeth were decoronated 1 mm below the cementoenamel junction and randomly assigned to two groups. Group 1 (n=40) was obturated with GuttaFlow®2 (Coltene/Whaledent, Germany), and Group 2 (n=40) with Thermafill (Dentsply DeTrey, Germany). All samples were scanned using a cone-beam micro-CT system (μCT 35, SCANCO Medical, Switzerland) to assess the length and quality of canal obturation. Results: Statistical analysis using the Kruskal-Wallis ANOVA test (H=4.0383, p=0.2574) showed no significant difference in obturation length between the two groups. Both cold (GuttaFlow®2) and warm (Thermafill) techniques achieved optimal filling lengths, indicating that obturation quality is not significantly influenced by the type of material or technique. Conclusion: Both GuttaFlow®2 and Thermafill systems are effective in achieving the desired obturation length. The choice between warm and cold obturation techniques may be based on clinician preference, as neither demonstrated superiority in this study.