Objectives: This study aimed to evaluate the content, quality and demographics of YouTube videos about rubber dam as an information source for clinicians and dental students. Materials and Methods: “Rubber dam,” “rubber dam application,” “dental isolation,” “rubber dam isolation,” and “dental dam” were determined as keywords for the detection of YouTube videos related to rubber dam. Seventy 3 videos were evaluated and a total of 34 videos met the inclusion criteria. All selected videos were evaluated according to 8 parameters. The videos were scored 1 if the videos contained information about the selected parameter, but if the videos did not contain enough information, they were scored 0. The data were statistically analyzed with the analysis of variance and post hoc Tukey test (p < 0.05). Results: We found that 41% of the videos have poor, 47% have moderate, and 12% have good information. There is a statistically significant difference in time between poor and good information content (p < 0.05). There is a statistically significant difference between the poor and good information in the video information and quality index 1. Conclusions Rubber dam-related videos available on YouTube are generally moderately informed and insufficient. YouTube is currently not sufficient as a source of information for patients and clinicians at the moment. The YouTube platform should be developed and enriched with quality information on current and dental issues.

Objectives: This study aimed to compare the effectiveness of a single-file reciprocating system (WaveOne Gold, WOG) and a multi-file rotary system (ProTaper Universal Retreatment, PTUR) in removing canal filling from severely curved canals and to evaluate the possible adjunctive effects of XP-Endo Finisher (XPF), the Self-Adjusting File (SAF), and an erbium, chromium: yttrium, scandium, gallium garnet (Er,Cr:YSGG) laser using microcomputed tomography (μCT). Materials and Methods: Sixty-six curved mandibular molars were divided into 2 groups based on the retreatment technique and then into 3 based on the supplementary method. The residual filling volumes and root canals were evaluated with μCT before and after retreatment, and after the supplementary steps. The data were statistically analyzed with the t-test, MannWhitney U test, analysis of covariance, and factorial analysis of variance (p < 0.05). Results: PTUR and WOG showed no significant difference in removing filling materials (p > 0.05). The supplementary techniques were significantly more effective than reciprocating or rotary systems only (p < 0.01). The supplementary steps showed no significant differences in canal filling removal effectiveness (p > 0.05), but XPF showed less dentin reduction than the SAF and Er,Cr:YSGG laser (p < 0.01). Conclusions The supplementary methods significantly decreased the volume of residual filling materials. XPF caused minimal changes in root canal volume and might be preferred for retreatment in curved root canals. Supplementary approaches after retreatment procedures may improve root canal cleanliness.