Smear layer removal by passive ultrasonic irrigation and 2 new mechanical methods for activation of the chelating solution
Machado Ricardo, da Silva Isadora, Comparin Daniel, de Mattos Bianca Araujo Marques, Alberton Luiz Romulo, da Silva Neto Ulisses Xavier,
소속 상세정보
( Machado Ricardo ) - Pontifical Catholic University of Parana Department of Endodontics
( da Silva Isadora ) - Paranaense University - UNIPAR Department of Endodontics
( Comparin Daniel ) - Paranaense University - UNIPAR Department of Endodontics
( de Mattos Bianca Araujo Marques ) - Pontifical Catholic University of Parana Department of Endodontics
( Alberton Luiz Romulo ) - Paranaense University - UNIPAR Department of Veterinary Medicine
( da Silva Neto Ulisses Xavier ) - Pontifical Catholic University of Parana Department of Endodontics
Abstract
Objectives: The aim of this study was to compare smear layer removal by conventional application (CA), passive ultrasonic irrigation (PUI), EasyClean (EC), and XP-Endo Finisher (XPF), using 17% ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA) after chemomechanical preparation, as evaluated with scanning electron microscopy (SEM).
Materials and Methods: Forty-five single-rooted human mandibular premolars were selected for this study. After chemomechanical preparation, the teeth were randomly divided into 5 groups according to the protocol for smear layer removal, as follows: G1 (control): CA of distilled water; G2 (CA): CA of 17% EDTA; G3 (PUI): 17% EDTA activated by PUI; G4 (EC): 17% EDTA activated by EC; and G5 (XPF): 17% EDTA activated by XPF. SEM images (×1,000) were obtained from each root third and scored by 3 examiners. Data were evaluated using the Kruskal-Wallis and Dunn tests (p < 0.05).
Results: In the apical third, there were no statistically significant differences among the groups (p > 0.05). In the cervical and middle thirds, the experimental groups performed better than the control group (p < 0.05); however, G2 presented better results than G3, G4, and G5 (p < 0.05), which showed no differences among one another (p > 0.05).
Conclusions: No irrigation method was able to completely remove the smear layer, especially in the apical third. Using CA for the chelating solution performed better than any form of activation.
키워드
Cleaning; Irrigation; Root canal
원문 및 링크아웃 정보
등재저널 정보