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...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Poletto, Daniel, Poletto, Ana Claudia, Cavalaro, Andressa, Machado, Ricardo, Cosme-Silva, Leopoldo, Garbelini, Cássia Cilene Dezan, Hoeppner, Márcio Grama
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