In this study, some physicochemical and antibacterial properties of three root canal filling materials for primary teeth, Calplus “CP” (Prevest DenPro, Lewes, DE, USA), Bio-C Pulpecto “Bio-CP” (Angelus, Basil, Londrina, Paraná, Brazil), and Zinc Oxide and Eugenol “ZOE” (Prevest DenPro, Lewes, DE, USA) were compared. For each material, the pH, solubility, contact angle, and crystalline microstructure under SEM were evaluated. Their antibacterial activity against Enterococcus faecalis was determined through direct tests. The Kruskal–Wallis test was used to analyze the results using a one-way analysis of variance on ranks. All the materials had an alkaline pH at 3, 24, and 72 h, with CalPlus having the highest (p < 0.05). Bio-CP was more soluble during the evaluation period (24 h) than ZOE and CalPlus (p < 0.05). Bio-CP and ZOE demonstrated the creation of crystallite structures on their surfaces after immersion in PBS at 37 °C, whereas CalPlus showed none. The lowest contact angle was observed for Bio-CP (53 ± 1.5°); contact angles of (86 ± 4°) and (96 ± 1°), respectively, were observed after 10 s of the deposition of the water drop for CalPlus and ZOE. In conclusion, according to this study, there is still a need to develop new filling materials for primary teeth. ZOE, CalPlus and Bio-CP demonstrated different physicochemical and antibacterial properties, but none of the materials had optimal properties and could be considered the most suitable filling material for primary teeth pulpectomy. Bioceramics in their current state are not an alternative. The physicochemical and antibacterial properties still need improvement to fit the intricate anatomy of primary teeth.

We assessed the efficiency of two shaping file systems and two passive ultrasonic irrigation (PUI) devices for removing filling material during retreatment. The mesial canals from 44 extracted mandibular molars were prepared and obturated. The teeth were randomly divided into two groups, and then one group was retreated with Reciproc R25 (VDW, Munich, Germany) (n = 44) and the other group was retreated with 2Shape (TS, Micro Mega, Besançon, France) (n = 44). A micro-computed tomography (CT) scan was taken before and after the retreatment to assess the volume of the filling material remnants. The teeth were then randomly divided into four groups to test two different PUI devices: Irrisafe (Satelec Acteon Group, Merignac, France) and Endo Ultra (Vista Dental Products, Racine, WI, USA). The teeth in Group A were retreated with 2Shape to test the Endo Ultra (n = 22) device, the teeth in Group B were retreated with 2Shape in order to test the Irrisafe (n = 22) device, the teeth in Group C were retreated with Reciproc to test the Endo Ultra (n = 22) device, and Group D was retreated with Reciproc to test the Irrisafe (n = 22) device. A third micro-CT scan was taken after the retreatment to test the PUIs. The percentage of Gutta-Percha (GP) and sealer removed was 94.75% for TS2 (p < 0.001) and 89.3% for R25 (p < 0.001). The PUI significantly enhanced the removal of the filling material by 0.76% for Group A (p < 0.001), 1.47% for Group B (p < 0.001), 2.61% for Group C (p < 0.001), and by 1.66% for Group D (p < 0.001). 2Shape was more effective at removing the GP and sealer during retreatment (p = 0.018). The supplementary approach with PUI significantly improved filling material removal, with no statistical difference between the four groups (p = 0.106).