A Comparative Scanning Electron Microscopy Evaluation of Smear Layer Removal from Teeth with Different Irrigation Solutions and Lasers

2013 ◽  
Vol 19 (6) ◽  
pp. 1465-1469 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elif Kalyoncuoğlu ◽  
Ebru Özsezer Demiryürek

AbstractThe aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of smear layer removal from teeth following root canals using lasers (Er:YAG and Nd:YAG), NaOCl, 17% EDTA, and MTAD by scanning electron microscopy (SEM). Root canals were irrigated with 3 mL of 5.25% NaOCl after each file. Teeth were randomly divided into five groups. In the final irrigation, canals were irrigated with 5.25% NaOCl (Group 1, control), 17% EDTA (Group 2), or BioPure MTAD (Group 3). Laser groups were irradiated with Er:YAG laser (1.8 W, 120 mJ, 15 Hz) (Group 4) or Nd:YAG laser (1 W, 100 mJ, 15 Hz) (Group 5). The smear layer at the apical, middle, and coronal thirds of each root canal was imaged using SEM. Smear layer removal by EDTA was the most effective in all regions. The difference between EDTA and MTAD was statistically significant in the coronal and middle (p < 0.05), but not the apical (p > 0.05), regions. The difference between the control and laser groups was not statistically significant (p > 0.05). In all regions, the difference between 17% EDTA–MTAD and the control–laser groups was statistically significant (p < 0.05). Although improvement was observed in removal of the smear layer using alternative materials and techniques, application of a combination of EDTA and NaOCl remains an effective technique.

2014 ◽  
Vol 2014 ◽  
pp. 1-5 ◽  
Author(s):  
Özgür Genç Şen ◽  
Sadullah Kaya ◽  
Özgür Er ◽  
Tayfun Alaçam

Mechanical instrumentation of root canals produces a smear layer that adversely affects the root canal seal. The aim of this study was to evaluate efficacy of MTAD and citric acid solutions used with self-adjusting file (SAF) system on smear layer. Twenty-three single-rooted human teeth were used for the study. Canals were instrumented manually up to a number 20 K file size. SAF was used to prepare the root canals. The following groups were studied: Group 1: MTAD + 5.25% NaOCl, Group 2: 20% citric acid + 5.25% NaOCl, and Group 3: Control (5.25% NaOCl). All roots were split longitudinally and subjected to scanning electron microscopy. The presence of smear layer in the coronal, middle, and apical thirds was evaluated using a five-score evaluation system. Kruskal-Wallis and Mann-Whitney U tests were used for statistical analysis. In the coronal third, Group 2 exhibited the best results and was statistically different froms the other groups (P<0.05). There was not a significant difference among the three thirds of groups according to in-group comparisons (P>0.05). The solutions used in Group 1 and 2 could effectively remove smear layer in most of the specimens. However, citric acid was more effective than MTAD in the three thirds of the canal.


2011 ◽  
Vol 19 (6) ◽  
pp. 639-643 ◽  
Author(s):  
George Táccio de Miranda Candeiro ◽  
Isabela Barbosa de Matos ◽  
Clarice Fernandes Eloy da Costa ◽  
Cristiane Sá Roriz Fonteles ◽  
Mônica Sampaio do Vale

Author(s):  
Dhanalakshmi Subramanian ◽  
Mahendran Kavitha ◽  
Anuraag Gurtu ◽  
Bakthavatchalam Balakrishnan ◽  
Mahalakshmi Jayaraman

Aim: To compare the effect of smear layer removal with 17% EDTA and Nd:YAG laser on the apical microleakage of two resin based sealers. Materials and Methods: Sixty freshly extracted maxillary central incisor teeth with patent canals were selected. The teeth were debrided and stored in saline for 24 hours before use. The teeth were sectioned at CEJ & cleaning and shaping were done upto 50 size by step back technique. The following groups were analyzed. GROUP 1:  Gutta percha (GP) + AH plus sealer without smear layer removal. GROUP 2:  GP + RC seal sealer without smear layer removal. GROUP 3:  GP + AH plus treated with 17% EDTA. GROUP 4:  GP + RC seal treated with 17% EDTA. GROUP 5:  GP + AH plus treated with Nd:YAG laser. GROUP 6:  GP + RC seal treated with Nd:YAG laser. 8 samples were subjected to dye penetration study for apical microleakage & 2 samples were subjected to SEM in each group to show the effect of smear layer removal by EDTA and laser. The data were analyzed by using ANOVA and TUKEY-HSD test. Results: Groups 1 and 2 showed maximum microleakage , other groups showed lesser microleakage but there was no statistically significant difference between laser and EDTA treated Groups.  Conclusion: EDTA and Nd:YAG laser can be effectively used to  remove smear layer and showed less apical microleakage compared to non-treated groups. Keywords: 17% EDTA, Nd:YAG LASER , AH plus , RC sealer ,  Smear layer.


2005 ◽  
Vol 13 (3) ◽  
pp. 247-252 ◽  
Author(s):  
José Eduardo Cezar Sampaio ◽  
Flávia Pavan Campos ◽  
Gibson Luiz Pilatti ◽  
Letícia Helena Theodoro ◽  
Fábio Renato Manzolli Leite

The aim of the present study was to compare root surface smear layer removal following topical application of EDTA and EDTA-T (Texapon). Extracted human teeth had their cementum removed and were mechanically scaled. A total of 220 root specimens were obtained and were randomly assigned to the following groups: I-saline solution (control), II-EDTA; III-EDTA-T. Groups II and III specimens were assigned to different EDTA gel concentrations: 5%, 10%, 15%, 20% and 24%. Smear layer removal score was assessed for each specimen by scanning electron microscopy. The results demonstrated that EDTA and EDTA-T gel led to a higher root surface smear layer removal when compared to the control group. The 5% EDTA gel also showed a higher smear layer removal than the 15%, 20% and 24% EDTA gels (p<0.05). No difference could be found between the different concentrations of EDTA-T gels tested (p>0.05). EDTA gels had statistically significantly lower smear layer scores than the EDTA-T gels for the 5% and 10% concentrations. The results suggested that topical application of EDTA or EDTA-T gel led to significant smear layer removal of the mechanically treated root surfaces. The addition of a detergent to the EDTA gel formula did not improve smear layer removal of the root surface.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document