Aim: Aim of the study is to check the efficiency of three different retreatment rotary file systems to remove filling material from the root canal. Materials and Methods: In this study 30 extracted human single rooted teeth were taken. The samples were instrumented using Protaper gold and then obturated with gutta percha using seal apex sealer. The samples were then randomly divided into 3 groups depending upon the retreatment rotary file systems used for removal of the filling material, Group 1- Neoendo retreatment files, (Orikam, India); Group 2 - Protaper Universal Retreatment system, (Dentsply Malliefer, Ballaigues, Switzerland); Group 3 - Hyflex Remover, (Coltene/Whaldent Altstatten Switzerland).Samples were then checked using CBCT for the amount of filling material left in the root canal after using the respective retreatment systems. Results: On evaluation though none of the sample showed complete removal of gutta-percha but Protaper Universal Retreatment system showed better result than Hyflex Remover file and Neoendo retreatment files. The remaining filling materials in the canals treated with Protaper Universal Retreatment system were less than Hyflex Remover file and Neoendo retreatment files. Conclusion: It can be concluded that Protaper Universal Retreatment system is better but rigid, Hyflex Remover file is good along with flexibility and Neoendo retreatment files are okay but very aggressive to work with. Keywords: CBCT, Hyflex Remover, Neoendo retreatment, Protaper Retreatment, Retreatment