Cargando…

Effectiveness of a novel chelating agent in removing calcium hydroxide using conventional and passive ultrasonic irrigation techniques

BACKGROUND: The present in vitro study aimed to compare the efficacy of a 25% copolymer of acrylic acid and maleic acid [poly(AA-co-MA)] and 17% of ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA) in removing calcium hydroxide (CH) from root canals using the master apical file (MAF) and passive ultrasonic irr...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Gorduysus, Mehmet-Omer, Gorduysus, Melahat, Annamma, Lovely-Muthiah
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Medicina Oral S.L. 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10625681/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37933390
http://dx.doi.org/10.4317/jced.60782
Descripción
Sumario:BACKGROUND: The present in vitro study aimed to compare the efficacy of a 25% copolymer of acrylic acid and maleic acid [poly(AA-co-MA)] and 17% of ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA) in removing calcium hydroxide (CH) from root canals using the master apical file (MAF) and passive ultrasonic irrigation (PUI). MATERIAL AND METHODS: Fifty-eight teeth were dressed with CH. After 10 days, CH was removed using MAF+EDTA, MAF+poly(AA-co-MA), PUI+EDTA, and PUI+poly (AA-co-MA) (n=12). Ten teeth were used as controls. Residual CH was evaluated using a four-grade scoring system. Data analysis was performed using the Mann-Whitney U, Friedman, and Dunn-Bonferroni tests. RESULTS: In the MAF and PUI groups, there was no significant difference in the CH scores between EDTA and Poly(AA-co-MA) (p<0.083). Although EDTA and poly(AA-co-MA) had lower CH scores when used with PUI, no significant difference was found between the two agents (p<0.083). CONCLUSIONS: Poly(AA-co-MA) did not remove significantly more CH than EDTA when used with MAF or PUI. Key words:Calcium hydroxide, Ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid, Acrylic acid, Maleic acid.