Cargando…
Smear layer removal by different chemical solutions used with or without ultrasonic activation after post preparation
OBJECTIVES: This study evaluated smear layer removal by different chemical solutions used with or without ultrasonic activation after post preparation. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Forty-five extracted uniradicular human mandibular premolars with single canals were treated endodontically. The cervical and...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
The Korean Academy of Conservative Dentistry
2017
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5682149/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29142881 http://dx.doi.org/10.5395/rde.2017.42.4.324 |
_version_ | 1783278048437600256 |
---|---|
author | Poletto, Daniel Poletto, Ana Claudia Cavalaro, Andressa Machado, Ricardo Cosme-Silva, Leopoldo Garbelini, Cássia Cilene Dezan Hoeppner, Márcio Grama |
author_facet | Poletto, Daniel Poletto, Ana Claudia Cavalaro, Andressa Machado, Ricardo Cosme-Silva, Leopoldo Garbelini, Cássia Cilene Dezan Hoeppner, Márcio Grama |
author_sort | Poletto, Daniel |
collection | PubMed |
description | OBJECTIVES: This study evaluated smear layer removal by different chemical solutions used with or without ultrasonic activation after post preparation. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Forty-five extracted uniradicular human mandibular premolars with single canals were treated endodontically. The cervical and middle thirds of the fillings were then removed, and the specimens were divided into 9 groups: G1, saline solution (NaCl); G2, 2.5% sodium hypochlorite (NaOCl); G3, 2% chlorhexidine (CHX); G4, 11.5% polyacrylic acid (PAA); G5, 17% ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA). For the groups 6, 7, 8, and 9, the same solutions used in the groups 2, 3, 4, and 5 were used, respectively, but activated with ultrasonic activation. Afterwards, the roots were analyzed by a score considering the images obtained from a scanning electron microscope. RESULTS: EDTA achieved the best performance compared with the other solutions evaluated regardless of the irrigation method (p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Ultrasonic activation did not significantly influence smear layer removal. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-5682149 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2017 |
publisher | The Korean Academy of Conservative Dentistry |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-56821492017-11-15 Smear layer removal by different chemical solutions used with or without ultrasonic activation after post preparation Poletto, Daniel Poletto, Ana Claudia Cavalaro, Andressa Machado, Ricardo Cosme-Silva, Leopoldo Garbelini, Cássia Cilene Dezan Hoeppner, Márcio Grama Restor Dent Endod Research Article OBJECTIVES: This study evaluated smear layer removal by different chemical solutions used with or without ultrasonic activation after post preparation. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Forty-five extracted uniradicular human mandibular premolars with single canals were treated endodontically. The cervical and middle thirds of the fillings were then removed, and the specimens were divided into 9 groups: G1, saline solution (NaCl); G2, 2.5% sodium hypochlorite (NaOCl); G3, 2% chlorhexidine (CHX); G4, 11.5% polyacrylic acid (PAA); G5, 17% ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA). For the groups 6, 7, 8, and 9, the same solutions used in the groups 2, 3, 4, and 5 were used, respectively, but activated with ultrasonic activation. Afterwards, the roots were analyzed by a score considering the images obtained from a scanning electron microscope. RESULTS: EDTA achieved the best performance compared with the other solutions evaluated regardless of the irrigation method (p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Ultrasonic activation did not significantly influence smear layer removal. The Korean Academy of Conservative Dentistry 2017-11 2017-11-01 /pmc/articles/PMC5682149/ /pubmed/29142881 http://dx.doi.org/10.5395/rde.2017.42.4.324 Text en Copyright © 2017. The Korean Academy of Conservative Dentistry https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Research Article Poletto, Daniel Poletto, Ana Claudia Cavalaro, Andressa Machado, Ricardo Cosme-Silva, Leopoldo Garbelini, Cássia Cilene Dezan Hoeppner, Márcio Grama Smear layer removal by different chemical solutions used with or without ultrasonic activation after post preparation |
title | Smear layer removal by different chemical solutions used with or without ultrasonic activation after post preparation |
title_full | Smear layer removal by different chemical solutions used with or without ultrasonic activation after post preparation |
title_fullStr | Smear layer removal by different chemical solutions used with or without ultrasonic activation after post preparation |
title_full_unstemmed | Smear layer removal by different chemical solutions used with or without ultrasonic activation after post preparation |
title_short | Smear layer removal by different chemical solutions used with or without ultrasonic activation after post preparation |
title_sort | smear layer removal by different chemical solutions used with or without ultrasonic activation after post preparation |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5682149/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29142881 http://dx.doi.org/10.5395/rde.2017.42.4.324 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT polettodaniel smearlayerremovalbydifferentchemicalsolutionsusedwithorwithoutultrasonicactivationafterpostpreparation AT polettoanaclaudia smearlayerremovalbydifferentchemicalsolutionsusedwithorwithoutultrasonicactivationafterpostpreparation AT cavalaroandressa smearlayerremovalbydifferentchemicalsolutionsusedwithorwithoutultrasonicactivationafterpostpreparation AT machadoricardo smearlayerremovalbydifferentchemicalsolutionsusedwithorwithoutultrasonicactivationafterpostpreparation AT cosmesilvaleopoldo smearlayerremovalbydifferentchemicalsolutionsusedwithorwithoutultrasonicactivationafterpostpreparation AT garbelinicassiacilenedezan smearlayerremovalbydifferentchemicalsolutionsusedwithorwithoutultrasonicactivationafterpostpreparation AT hoeppnermarciograma smearlayerremovalbydifferentchemicalsolutionsusedwithorwithoutultrasonicactivationafterpostpreparation |