Cargando…
Effect of different final irrigating solutions on smear layer removal in apical third of root canal: A scanning electron microscope study
AIM: The aim of this in vitro study is to compare the smear layer removal efficacy of different irrigating solutions at the apical third of the root canal. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Forty human single-rooted mandibular premolar teeth were taken and decoronated to standardize the canal length to 14 mm....
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd
2016
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4760023/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26957801 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/0972-0707.173207 |
_version_ | 1782416832468090880 |
---|---|
author | Vemuri, Sayesh Kolanu, Sreeha Kaluva Varri, Sujana Pabbati, Ravi Kumar Penumaka, Ramesh Bolla, Nagesh |
author_facet | Vemuri, Sayesh Kolanu, Sreeha Kaluva Varri, Sujana Pabbati, Ravi Kumar Penumaka, Ramesh Bolla, Nagesh |
author_sort | Vemuri, Sayesh |
collection | PubMed |
description | AIM: The aim of this in vitro study is to compare the smear layer removal efficacy of different irrigating solutions at the apical third of the root canal. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Forty human single-rooted mandibular premolar teeth were taken and decoronated to standardize the canal length to 14 mm. They were prepared by ProTaper rotary system to an apical preparation of file size F3. Prepared teeth were randomly divided into four groups (n = 10); saline (Group 1; negative control), ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (Group 2), BioPure MTAD (Group 3), and QMix 2 in 1 (Group 4). After final irrigation with tested irrigants, the teeth were split into two halves longitudinally and observed under a scanning electron microscope (SEM) for the removal of smear layer. The SEM images were then analyzed for the amount of smear layer present using a three score system. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Data are analyzed using the Kruskal-Wallis test and Mann-Whitney U-test. RESULTS: Intergroup comparison of groups showed statistically significant difference in the smear layer removal efficacy of irrigants tested. QMix 2 in 1 is most effective in removal of smear layer when compared to other tested irrigants. CONCLUSION: QMix 2 in 1 is the most effective final irrigating solution for smear layer removal. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-4760023 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2016 |
publisher | Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-47600232016-03-08 Effect of different final irrigating solutions on smear layer removal in apical third of root canal: A scanning electron microscope study Vemuri, Sayesh Kolanu, Sreeha Kaluva Varri, Sujana Pabbati, Ravi Kumar Penumaka, Ramesh Bolla, Nagesh J Conserv Dent Original Article AIM: The aim of this in vitro study is to compare the smear layer removal efficacy of different irrigating solutions at the apical third of the root canal. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Forty human single-rooted mandibular premolar teeth were taken and decoronated to standardize the canal length to 14 mm. They were prepared by ProTaper rotary system to an apical preparation of file size F3. Prepared teeth were randomly divided into four groups (n = 10); saline (Group 1; negative control), ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (Group 2), BioPure MTAD (Group 3), and QMix 2 in 1 (Group 4). After final irrigation with tested irrigants, the teeth were split into two halves longitudinally and observed under a scanning electron microscope (SEM) for the removal of smear layer. The SEM images were then analyzed for the amount of smear layer present using a three score system. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Data are analyzed using the Kruskal-Wallis test and Mann-Whitney U-test. RESULTS: Intergroup comparison of groups showed statistically significant difference in the smear layer removal efficacy of irrigants tested. QMix 2 in 1 is most effective in removal of smear layer when compared to other tested irrigants. CONCLUSION: QMix 2 in 1 is the most effective final irrigating solution for smear layer removal. Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd 2016 /pmc/articles/PMC4760023/ /pubmed/26957801 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/0972-0707.173207 Text en Copyright: © Journal of Conservative Dentistry http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0 This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 License, which allows others to remix, tweak, and build upon the work non-commercially, as long as the author is credited and the new creations are licensed under the identical terms. |
spellingShingle | Original Article Vemuri, Sayesh Kolanu, Sreeha Kaluva Varri, Sujana Pabbati, Ravi Kumar Penumaka, Ramesh Bolla, Nagesh Effect of different final irrigating solutions on smear layer removal in apical third of root canal: A scanning electron microscope study |
title | Effect of different final irrigating solutions on smear layer removal in apical third of root canal: A scanning electron microscope study |
title_full | Effect of different final irrigating solutions on smear layer removal in apical third of root canal: A scanning electron microscope study |
title_fullStr | Effect of different final irrigating solutions on smear layer removal in apical third of root canal: A scanning electron microscope study |
title_full_unstemmed | Effect of different final irrigating solutions on smear layer removal in apical third of root canal: A scanning electron microscope study |
title_short | Effect of different final irrigating solutions on smear layer removal in apical third of root canal: A scanning electron microscope study |
title_sort | effect of different final irrigating solutions on smear layer removal in apical third of root canal: a scanning electron microscope study |
topic | Original Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4760023/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26957801 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/0972-0707.173207 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT vemurisayesh effectofdifferentfinalirrigatingsolutionsonsmearlayerremovalinapicalthirdofrootcanalascanningelectronmicroscopestudy AT kolanusreehakaluva effectofdifferentfinalirrigatingsolutionsonsmearlayerremovalinapicalthirdofrootcanalascanningelectronmicroscopestudy AT varrisujana effectofdifferentfinalirrigatingsolutionsonsmearlayerremovalinapicalthirdofrootcanalascanningelectronmicroscopestudy AT pabbatiravikumar effectofdifferentfinalirrigatingsolutionsonsmearlayerremovalinapicalthirdofrootcanalascanningelectronmicroscopestudy AT penumakaramesh effectofdifferentfinalirrigatingsolutionsonsmearlayerremovalinapicalthirdofrootcanalascanningelectronmicroscopestudy AT bollanagesh effectofdifferentfinalirrigatingsolutionsonsmearlayerremovalinapicalthirdofrootcanalascanningelectronmicroscopestudy |