scholarly journals The Smear Layer Removal Efficiency of Different Concentrations of EDTA in primary teeth: A SEM Study

Author(s):  
Akif DEMİREL
2019 ◽  
Vol 77 (5) ◽  
pp. 380-385 ◽  
Author(s):  
Akif Demirel ◽  
Burcu Nihan Yüksel ◽  
Meryem Ziya ◽  
Hüsniye Gümüş ◽  
Salih Doğan ◽  
...  

2013 ◽  
Vol 14 (6) ◽  
pp. 1028-1035
Author(s):  
Sangeetha Vallikanthan ◽  
K Balakoti Reddy ◽  
Shreemoy Dash ◽  
Sowmya Kallepalli ◽  
N Chakrapani ◽  
...  

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.


2015 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
pp. 137
Author(s):  
Shilpi Gupta ◽  
Mallikarjuna Kenchappa ◽  
Puneet Gupta ◽  
Sandhya Chaurasiya ◽  
Priyamvada Sharma ◽  
...  

2006 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. 9-16 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. Cemal Tinaz ◽  
Tayfun Alaçam ◽  
L. Sibel Karadag ◽  
Tansev Mihçioğlu

Abstract Obtaining the cleanest canal possible before obturation is one of the goals of endodontic treatment. The purpose of this study was to compare the smear layer removal capability of ethylenediamine tetra-acetic acid (EDTA) application with passive ultrasonic and cotton wrapped on reamer activation. Twelve extracted human teeth with single root canals were used for the study. They were conventionally hand instrumented using reamers and K files. The apical aspect of the canals was enlarged to a #40 file. The teeth were divided into 4 four groups, instrumented and irrigated as follows: Group-A EDTA agitated at the end of preparation with cotton wrapped on a reamer for 1 min; Group-B EDTA applied with ultrasonic agitation for 1 min; Group-C irrigated with EDTA+sodium hypochlorite (NaOCl) (negative control group); and Group-D irrigated with distilled water (positive control group). After scanning electron microscopic study at three different levels, smear layer and dentinal tubules were scored. Means were tested for significance using the Z test. When the techniques were compared, the cotton wrapped on reamer agitation method was as successful as the ultrasonic activation of the files. Although all groups had significantly higher smear layer scores at apical compared to coronal sections, no significant differences were recorded. Citation Tinaz AC, Karadag LS, Alaçam T, Mihçioglu T. Evaluation of the Smear Layer Removal Effectiveness of EDTA Using Two Techniques: An SEM Study. J Contemp Dent Pract 2006 February;(7)1:009-016.


2021 ◽  
Vol 22 (5) ◽  
pp. 527-531
Author(s):  
Saurabh Mankeliya ◽  
Neha Jaiswal ◽  
Rajnish K Singhal ◽  
Anushri Gupta ◽  
Vivek K Pathak ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document