Tehran University of Medical Sciences Frontiers in Dentistry 2676-296X 22 0 2025 10 14 4723 4723 Salma Omidi 1. Dental Research Center, Mazandaran University of Medical Sciences, Sari, Iran 2. Department of Endodontics, School of Dentistry, Mazandaran University of Medical Sciences, Sari, Iran Sadaf Rahmanirad Private practice, Sari, Iran Ali Jafari Private practice, Sari, Iran Mahmood Moosazadeh Gastrointestinal Cancer Research Center, Non-Communicable Diseases Institute, Mazandaran University of Medical Sciences, Sari, Iran Hadis Abbaspourrokni Department of Endodontics, School of Dentistry, Mazandaran University of Medical Sciences, Sari, Iran Mona Alimohammadi Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology, School of Dentistry, Mazandaran University of Medical Sciences, Sari, Iran 2023 01 04 2023 12 02 Objectives: Retrievability is an important characteristic for an endodontic sealer. This study compared the retrieval of Endoseal MTA, AH Plus, and MTA Fillapex in endodontic retreatment using cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT). Materials and Methods: This in vitro study was conducted on 45 radiographically confirmed single-rooted and single-canal mandibular premolars. The root canals were instrumented by the Denco Universal rotary system up to size F3, and randomly divided into 3 groups for the application of either AH Plus, Endoseal MTA, or MTA Fillapex and subsequent root canal obturation. Next, the root filling materials were removed using chloroform solvent and Denco Universal retreatment rotary system. The roots then underwent CBCT with the Gaussian and nonlinear diffusion filters for noise reduction. The residual sealer volume on the root canal walls was quantified on axial CBCT sections using MATLAB R2012 version 14 software. Data were analyzed by the Kruskal-Wallis and Dunn tests (alpha=0.05). Results: The residual sealer volume was significantly different among the three groups (P<0.001) and was the highest in Endoseal MTA (2.70±2.41mm3). The residual volume of Endoseal MTA sealer was significantly greater than MTA Fillapex (P=0.009). However, the difference between AH Plus and Endoseal MTA (P=0.592), or AH Plus and MTA Fillapex (P=0.352) was not significant. Conclusion: Within the limitations of this in vitro study and considering the residual sealer volume, retrieval of Endoseal MTA was comparable to that of AH Plus, and lower than that of MTA Fillapex in endodontic retreatment. https://fid.tums.ac.ir/index.php/fid/article/view/4723 https://fid.tums.ac.ir/index.php/fid/article/download/4723/2169