scholarly journals A Comparative Evaluation of Cleaning Efficacy (Debris and Smear Layer Removal) of Hand and Two NiTi Rotary Instrumentation Systems (K3 and ProTaper): A SEM Study

2013 ◽  
Vol 14 (6) ◽  
pp. 1028-1035
Author(s):  
Sangeetha Vallikanthan ◽  
K Balakoti Reddy ◽  
Shreemoy Dash ◽  
Sowmya Kallepalli ◽  
N Chakrapani ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Root Canal ◽  
Comparative Evaluation ◽  
Group Iv ◽  
Smear Layer ◽  
Layer Removal ◽  
Group I ◽  
Rotary Instruments ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Sem Study ◽  
Cleaning Efficacy

ABSTRACT Objectives The present study was conducted to compare the cleaning efficacy (debris and smear layer removal) of hand and two NiTi rotary instrumentation systems (K3 and ProTaper). Materials and methods Sixty single rooted human maxillary anterior teeth decoronated at the cementoenamel junction were used. All the specimens were divided into four groups of 15 teeth each, group I—ProTaper rotary instrumentation done, group II—K3 rotary instrumentation done, group III—Stainless steel K-file instrumentation done, group IV—root canal irrigation without instrumentation. Root canal preparation was done in a crown down manner and 3% sodium hypochlorite was used as irrigant after each file followed by final rinse with 5 ml of 17% EDTA solution, then specimens were scanning electron microscopic (SEM) examination. Results Statistical analysis was done using one-way ANOVA followed by post hoc Tukey's HSD test. Group I showed highly statistical significant difference compared to other groups. There was no statistically significant difference considering smear layer at any levels among the groups with no smear layer formation in group IV. Conclusion ProTaper rotary instrumentation showed the maximum cleaning efficacy followed by K3 rotary instrumentation in the coronal, middle and apical thirds of the root canal. Clinical significance ProTaper rotary instruments are more efficient than hand and K3 rotary instruments during root canal treatment. How to cite this article Reddy KB, Dash S, Kallepalli S, Vallikanthan S, Chakrapani N, Kalepu V. A Comparative Evaluation of Cleaning Efficacy (Debris and Smear Layer Removal) of Hand and Two NiTi Rotary Instrumentation Systems (K3 and ProTaper): A SEM Study. J Contemp Dent Pract 2013;14(6):1028-1035.

scholarly journals Comparative Evaluation of Cleaning Efficacy using Four Novel Nickel–titanium Rotary Instruments: An in vitro Scanning Electron Microscope Study

2017 ◽  
Vol 18 (12) ◽  
pp. 1135-1143
Author(s):  
Prem P Kar ◽  
Sandhya A Khasnis ◽  
Krisnamurthy H Kidiyoor
Keyword(s):  
Electron Microscope ◽  
Scanning Electron Microscope ◽  
Root Canal ◽  
Nickel Titanium ◽  
Smear Layer ◽  
Layer Removal ◽  
Rotary Instruments ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Cleaning Efficacy ◽  
Scanning Electron

ABSTRACT Aim The aim of the study was to compare the cleaning efficacy (debris and smear layer removal) of two multifile rotary systems (MTwo and Silk) and two single-file rotary systems (F6 Skytaper and NeoNiTi). Materials and methods Eighty mesial canals of mandibular first molars were cleaned and shaped using four nickel–titanium (NiTi) rotary instruments to size # 25 and 3% NaOCl and 17% ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA). Samples were randomly divided into four equal groups (n = 20) according to instrumentation: Group I, Mtwo; group II, Silk; group III, F6 Skytaper; group IV, NeoNiTi. Samples were split longitudinally and examined under scanning electron microscope (SEM) for debris and smear layer removal in coronal, middle, and apical thirds of each root canal. Results F6 skytaper and Mtwo groups showed significantly higher debris removal than Silk and NeoNiTi groups in apical third of root canal as well as when compared with NeoNiTi group in middle third. F6 Skytaper group showed significantly higher debris and smear layer removal than Silk group in coronal third. There was statistically significant difference among all thirds of root canal in terms of debris removal in Silk and NeoNiTi groups. There was statistically significant difference among all thirds of root canal in F6 Skytaper and NeoNiTi groups in terms of smear layer removal. Conclusion F6 Skytaper single-file rotary instrumentation showed the maximum cleaning efficacy followed by Mtwo multifile rotary instrumentation in all thirds of root canal. Clinical significance F6 Skytaper rotary instrument is most efficient followed by Mtwo rotary instrument among all rotary instruments. How to cite this article Kar PP, Khasnis SA, Kidiyoor KH. Comparative Evaluation of Cleaning Efficacy using Four Novel Nickel-titanium Rotary Instruments: An in vitro Scanning Electron Microscope Study. J Contemp Dent Pract 2017;18(12):1135-1143.

scholarly journals A Comparative Evaluation of Smear Layer Removal by Using Four Different Irrigation Solutions like Root Canal Irrigants: An In Vitro SEM Study

2021 ◽  
Vol 22 (5) ◽  
pp. 527-531
Author(s):  
Saurabh Mankeliya ◽  
Neha Jaiswal ◽  
Rajnish K Singhal ◽  
Anushri Gupta ◽  
Vivek K Pathak ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Root Canal ◽  
Comparative Evaluation ◽  
Smear Layer ◽  
Layer Removal ◽  
Root Canal Irrigants ◽  
Sem Study

scholarly journals Comparative Evaluation of Root Canal Dentin on Efficacy of Smear Layer Removal with Nd:YAG Laser and EDTA after Rotary Instrumentation – SEM Study

2013 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
pp. 44-48 ◽  
Author(s):  
Srikanth Pasari ◽  
Narender Reddy ◽  
Shilpa Reddy Admala ◽  
Sainath Reddy ◽  
Manoranjan Reddy ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Nd:Yag Laser ◽  
Root Canal ◽  
Comparative Evaluation ◽  
Smear Layer ◽  
Layer Removal ◽  
Sem Study ◽  
Root Canal Dentin

scholarly journals Comparative Evaluation of the Efficacy of Newer Irrigating Solutions in the Removal of Smear Layer Using SEM

2021 ◽  
pp. 76-83
Author(s):  
Srivalli Podili ◽  
Parvataneni Krishna Prasad ◽  
T. B. V. G. Raju ◽  
Mahendra Varma Nadimpalli ◽  
Gowtam Dev Dondapati ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Electron Microscopy ◽  
Phytic Acid ◽  
Root Canal ◽  
Comparative Evaluation ◽  
Smear Layer ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Layer Removal ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Conventional Irrigation ◽  
Scanning Electron

Aim: To compare the effect of EDTA, Phytic acid and Peracitic acid on smear layer removal by effective conventional irrigation. Materials and Methodology: A total of 50 extracted mandibular premolars were selected. The canals were instrumented by rotary system up to F2 ProTaper and irrigated with 3% NaOCL simultaneously, teeth were divided into 4 groups according to the final irrigants: 17% EDTA; 2.25% PERACITIC ACID; 1% Phytic Acid; and saline. The canals were irrigated with 25 guage side vented needles for 5 minutes. Specimens were examined under scanning electron microscopy (SEM). Smear layer removal was evaluated at coronal, middle and apical thirds of the root canal. The data is analyzed using the Kruskal-Wallis and Mann-Whitney U tests. Results: In this study, the control group that is normal saline (4.05 ± 1.06) showed very less amount of smear layer removal. The highest amount of smear layer removal was seen in the group with phytic acid followed by peracitic acid and sodium hypochlorite groups. The apical third showed significantly more smear layer than the coronal and middle thirds (p<0.05). No significant difference was found between the coronal and middle thirds in all experimental groups (p>0.05). Conclusion: 1% phytic acid was the most effective in removing the smear layer at each level of the root canal followed by 2.5% peracitic and 17% EDTA.

scholarly journals In Vitro Evaluation of Antibacterial Properties and Smear Layer Removal/Sealer Penetration of a Novel Silver-Citrate Root Canal Irrigant

Materials ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 13 (1) ◽  
pp. 194 ◽  
Author(s):  
Riccardo Tonini ◽  
Massimo Giovarruscio ◽  
Fabio Gorni ◽  
Andrei Ionescu ◽  
Eugenio Brambilla ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Root Canal ◽  
Ethylenediaminetetraacetic Acid ◽  
Antibacterial Properties ◽  
Phosphate Buffer Solution ◽  
Smear Layer ◽  
Tetrazolium Salt ◽  
Apical Portion ◽  
Layer Removal ◽  
Root Canal Irrigation ◽  
Group I

This study aimed at evaluating the efficacy of a novel silver-citrate root canal irrigation solution (BioAKT) on smear layer removal, sealer penetration after root canal instrumentation and antibacterial activity. Single-root teeth were endodontically treated, sealed with an epoxi-amine resin sealer and irrigated using: Group I: 5.25% sodium hypochlorite (NaOCl); Group II: silver-citrate solution (BioAKT); Group III: phosphate buffer solution (PBS); Group IV: 17% ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA). Smear layer removal and silver deposition at the coronal, middle and apical portion of each canal were analyzed using scanning electron microscopy (SEM) and energy-dispersive x-ray spectroscopy (EDS). Sealer penetration into dentinal tubules at coronal, middle and apical portion was assessed through dye-assisted confocal microscopy (CSM). Both SEM and CSM micrographs were evaluated by two examiners (κ = 0.86), who were blind to the irrigation regimens; scores were given according to the degree of penetration of the sealer. Data analysis included Pearson’s x2 and Sidak’s multiple comparisons. Dentin discs were polished and sterilized. Enterococcus faecalis biofilms were grown using a continuous-flow bioreactor under anaerobic conditions for 72 h. Specimens were irrigated with the tested solutions, and bacterial viability was assessed using a tetrazolium salt assay (MTT). Statistical analysis included one-way ANOVA and Student’s post-hoc t-test (p < 0.05). BioAKT and EDTA were the most efficient solutions both in removing the smear layer and allowing sealer penetration. However, at the apical portion BioAKT performed significantly better compared to EDTA both in smear layer removal and sealer penetration (p < 0.05). BioAKT and NaOCl showed comparable antibacterial effect (p = 0.53). In conclusion, BioAKT represents a suitable smear layer removal agent, which allows for reliable sealer penetration at the apical portion of the root canal system and offers significant antibacterial properties.

scholarly journals Evaluation of four final irrigation protocols for cleaning root canal walls

2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Qiang Li ◽  
Qian Zhang ◽  
Xiaoying Zou ◽  
Lin Yue
Keyword(s):  
Root Canal ◽  
Laser Scanning ◽  
Laser Scanning Microscopy ◽  
Smear Layer ◽  
Confocal Laser ◽  
Bacterial Survival ◽  
Bacterial Inhibition ◽  
Layer Removal ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Canal Systems

Abstract The aim of this study was to compare the efficiency of four final irrigation protocols in smear layer removal and bacterial inhibition in root canal systems. Thirty roots inoculated with Enterococcus faecalis were prepared with ProTaper Universal files. The teeth were disinfected by conventional needle irrigation, sonic agitation using the EndoActivator device, passive ultrasonic irrigation, or an M3 Max file. Teeth with no root canal preparation served as blank controls for the establishment of the infection baseline. Teeth with preparation but no final irrigation served as a post-instrumentation baseline. After the final irrigation, the teeth were sectioned in half. One half of each tooth was examined by scanning electron microscopy (SEM) to assess smear layer removal using a five-point scale. The other half was examined by confocal laser scanning microscopy (CLSM) using the LIVE/DEAD BackLight bacterial viability kit to evaluate the depth of bacterial survival in dentinal tubules. SEM analysis revealed no significant difference in smear layer removal throughout the whole canal among the EA, PUI, and M3 Max groups (P > 0.05). CLSM revealed that PUI achieved the greatest bacterial inhibition depth in the coronal ((174.27 ± 31.63) μm), middle ((160.94 ± 37.77) μm), and apical ((119.53 ± 28.49) μm) thirds of the canal (all P < 0.05 vs. other groups). According to this comprehensive SEM and CLSM evaluation, PUI appears to have the best infection control ability in root canal systems.

scholarly journals Comparative Evaluation of Smear Layer Removal Using Four Different Irrigation Techniques: An in-vitro Study

2019 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
pp. 80-86
Author(s):  
Ajay Chhabra ◽  
Apoorva Rana ◽  
Nisha Garg ◽  
Ruhani Bhatia ◽  
Shobit Sethi
Keyword(s):  
In Vitro Study ◽  
Group Iv ◽  
Smear Layer ◽  
Passive Ultrasonic Irrigation ◽  
Group Iii ◽  
Layer Removal ◽  
Group I ◽  
Individual Comparison ◽  
Ultrasonic Irrigation

INTRODUCTION: Irrigation is the vital part of root canal debridement. Usually post biomechanical preparation, the canal walls are covered by smear layer. It is important to remove this layer before obturation for better bond between the filling and walls. Conventional needle irrigation doesn’t give us adequate cleaning, therefore, new irrigation techniques are being tried to facilitate better smear layer removal. AIM: The aim was to evaluate and compare the smear layer removal by PATS,  EndoActivator device, Passive ultrasonic irrigation and side vent needle irrigation from canal walls. MATERIALS AND METHODS:  60 extracted mandibular premolars were instrumented up to 35/.04 with Heroshaper files. Samples were divided into 4 groups randomly before final irrigation as follows: Group I (n=15): Irrigation with side vent needles (Nexus ltd.,India), Group II (n=15): Irrigation with EndoActivator (Advanced Endodontics, Santa Barbara, CA ) Group III (n=15): Irrigation with PATS ( InnovationsEndo,India), Group IV (n=15): Irrigation with ultrasonic tips (Mani inc.). Teeth were split and one-half of each tooth was chosen for SEM examination.  The images were taken at apical third and scoring was done according to criteria by Torabinejad et al in 2003. Data obtained were analyzed using Kruskal-Wallis analysis of variance followed by Mann–Whitney U-test for individual comparison. RESULTS: All irrigating systems remove smear layer but PUI has better cleaning ability as compared to other groups. CONCLUSION: Passive ultrasonic irrigation shows better smear layer removal as compared to other techniques

scholarly journals Comparison Between Different Endodontic Irrigating Protocols In Smear Layer Removal From Radicular Dentin

2016 ◽  
Vol 12 (15) ◽  
pp. 38
Author(s):  
Ramona Vlad ◽  
Monika Kovacs ◽  
Dragos Sita ◽  
Mihai Pop
Keyword(s):  
Root Canal ◽  
Endodontic Treatment ◽  
Smear Layer ◽  
Friedman Test ◽  
Cleaning Efficiency ◽  
Layer Removal ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
System Data ◽  
Root Canal Dentin ◽  
Level Of Significance

The aim of our study was to measure the cleaning efficiency of irrigating solutions used during endodontic treatment regarding smear layer removal from the root canal dentin walls. Ethylenediaminotetraacetic acid (EDTA) 17%, citric acid (CA) 10% and sodium hypochlorite (NaOCl) 2,5 % solutions were tested as final irrigating solutions. The study was conducted on extracted teeth, divided in four groups according to the irrigation protocol used. The specimens were analyzed by scanning electron microscopy and the amount of smear layer present at apical, middle and coronal level was recorded, based on a scoring system. Data were statistically analyzed using Kruskal-Wallis and Friedman test and the level of significance was set at p<0.05. In the coronal and middle segments of dental roots we noticed no statistically significant difference between EDTA and CA in smear layer removing capacity. Final irrigation with 17% EDTA proved to be more efficient than 10% CA and 2,5% NaOCl in smear layer removal at apical level of the root canal, with p<0.05 (p=0.042), which is an important area for disinfection in endodontic treatment.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document