Cargando…
Smear Layer Removal in the Apical Third of Root Canals by Two Chelating Agents and Laser: A Comparative in vitro Study
Introduction: Smear layer (SL) is produced as a result of mechanical instrumentation of the canal(s). Despite the controversies regarding its removal, the evidence-based trend has shifted towards removing and eliminating the SL. Different methods have been used to remove the SL and the aim of this i...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Iranian Center for Endodontic Research
2014
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4099954/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25031596 |
_version_ | 1782326583074226176 |
---|---|
author | Ashraf, Hengameh Asnaashari, Mohammad Darmiani, Soheila Birang, Reza |
author_facet | Ashraf, Hengameh Asnaashari, Mohammad Darmiani, Soheila Birang, Reza |
author_sort | Ashraf, Hengameh |
collection | PubMed |
description | Introduction: Smear layer (SL) is produced as a result of mechanical instrumentation of the canal(s). Despite the controversies regarding its removal, the evidence-based trend has shifted towards removing and eliminating the SL. Different methods have been used to remove the SL and the aim of this in vitro study was to evaluate the ability of 17% ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA), 18% etidronate and Er: YAG on effective removal of the SL. Methods and Materials: Fifty straight single-rooted teeth were divided into three experimental groups (n=15) and one control group of five. The canals were instrumented with HERO 642 rotary files up to 30/0.06. In group 1, canals were irradiated with Er: YAG laser; in groups 2 and 3, canals were irrigated with 17% EDTA and 18% etidronate, respectively. In group 4 (control) distilled water was used for canal irrigation. The amount of remaining SL was quantified according to Hulsmann’s method with scanning electron microscopy (SEM). Data was analyzed by the Kruskal-Wallis and Mann-Whitney U tests (P<0.05). Results: The results showed statistically significant differences in terms of SL removal among the groups (P<0.05). The amount of removed SL by EDTA was significantly greater followed by Er: YAG laser and 18% etidronate. Conclusion: Within the limitations of this study, EDTA was more effective in removing SL compared to Er: YAG and etidronate. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-4099954 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2014 |
publisher | Iranian Center for Endodontic Research |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-40999542014-07-16 Smear Layer Removal in the Apical Third of Root Canals by Two Chelating Agents and Laser: A Comparative in vitro Study Ashraf, Hengameh Asnaashari, Mohammad Darmiani, Soheila Birang, Reza Iran Endod J Original Article Introduction: Smear layer (SL) is produced as a result of mechanical instrumentation of the canal(s). Despite the controversies regarding its removal, the evidence-based trend has shifted towards removing and eliminating the SL. Different methods have been used to remove the SL and the aim of this in vitro study was to evaluate the ability of 17% ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA), 18% etidronate and Er: YAG on effective removal of the SL. Methods and Materials: Fifty straight single-rooted teeth were divided into three experimental groups (n=15) and one control group of five. The canals were instrumented with HERO 642 rotary files up to 30/0.06. In group 1, canals were irradiated with Er: YAG laser; in groups 2 and 3, canals were irrigated with 17% EDTA and 18% etidronate, respectively. In group 4 (control) distilled water was used for canal irrigation. The amount of remaining SL was quantified according to Hulsmann’s method with scanning electron microscopy (SEM). Data was analyzed by the Kruskal-Wallis and Mann-Whitney U tests (P<0.05). Results: The results showed statistically significant differences in terms of SL removal among the groups (P<0.05). The amount of removed SL by EDTA was significantly greater followed by Er: YAG laser and 18% etidronate. Conclusion: Within the limitations of this study, EDTA was more effective in removing SL compared to Er: YAG and etidronate. Iranian Center for Endodontic Research 2014 2014-07-05 /pmc/articles/PMC4099954/ /pubmed/25031596 Text en © 2014, Iranian Center for Endodontic Research This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/) which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Original Article Ashraf, Hengameh Asnaashari, Mohammad Darmiani, Soheila Birang, Reza Smear Layer Removal in the Apical Third of Root Canals by Two Chelating Agents and Laser: A Comparative in vitro Study |
title | Smear Layer Removal in the Apical Third of Root Canals by Two Chelating Agents and Laser: A Comparative in vitro Study |
title_full | Smear Layer Removal in the Apical Third of Root Canals by Two Chelating Agents and Laser: A Comparative in vitro Study |
title_fullStr | Smear Layer Removal in the Apical Third of Root Canals by Two Chelating Agents and Laser: A Comparative in vitro Study |
title_full_unstemmed | Smear Layer Removal in the Apical Third of Root Canals by Two Chelating Agents and Laser: A Comparative in vitro Study |
title_short | Smear Layer Removal in the Apical Third of Root Canals by Two Chelating Agents and Laser: A Comparative in vitro Study |
title_sort | smear layer removal in the apical third of root canals by two chelating agents and laser: a comparative in vitro study |
topic | Original Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4099954/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25031596 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT ashrafhengameh smearlayerremovalintheapicalthirdofrootcanalsbytwochelatingagentsandlaseracomparativeinvitrostudy AT asnaasharimohammad smearlayerremovalintheapicalthirdofrootcanalsbytwochelatingagentsandlaseracomparativeinvitrostudy AT darmianisoheila smearlayerremovalintheapicalthirdofrootcanalsbytwochelatingagentsandlaseracomparativeinvitrostudy AT birangreza smearlayerremovalintheapicalthirdofrootcanalsbytwochelatingagentsandlaseracomparativeinvitrostudy |