Cargando…

Effectiveness of Different Irrigant Activation Systems on Smear Layer Removal: A Scanning Electron Microscopic Study

The aim of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of smear layer removal after the use of different irrigation methods (passive ultrasonic irrigation (PUI), continuous ultrasonic irrigation (CUI), apical negative pressure irrigation and conventional irrigation) using scanning electron microsco...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Miguéns-Vila, Ramón, Martín-Biedma, Benjamín, Aboy-Pazos, Saleta, Uroz-Torres, David, Álvarez-Nóvoa, Pablo, Dablanca-Blanco, Ana Belén, Varela-Aneiros, Iván, Castelo-Baz, Pablo
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8879012/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35207275
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jcm11041003
_version_ 1784658796853854208
author Miguéns-Vila, Ramón
Martín-Biedma, Benjamín
Aboy-Pazos, Saleta
Uroz-Torres, David
Álvarez-Nóvoa, Pablo
Dablanca-Blanco, Ana Belén
Varela-Aneiros, Iván
Castelo-Baz, Pablo
author_facet Miguéns-Vila, Ramón
Martín-Biedma, Benjamín
Aboy-Pazos, Saleta
Uroz-Torres, David
Álvarez-Nóvoa, Pablo
Dablanca-Blanco, Ana Belén
Varela-Aneiros, Iván
Castelo-Baz, Pablo
author_sort Miguéns-Vila, Ramón
collection PubMed
description The aim of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of smear layer removal after the use of different irrigation methods (passive ultrasonic irrigation (PUI), continuous ultrasonic irrigation (CUI), apical negative pressure irrigation and conventional irrigation) using scanning electron microscopy (SEM) as an analytical tool. A total of 100 single-canal teeth were decoronated and randomly divided into five groups (n = 20) according to the irrigation method used: conventional irrigation with front outlet syringe, conventional irrigation with lateral outlet syringe, apical negative pressure irrigation (EndoVac), PUI with Irrisafe and CUI with ProUltra PiezoFlow ultrasonic irrigation needle. Root canal preparation was performed with the ProTaper Gold system up to the F4 instrument, and 5.25% NaOCl was used as an irrigant. After chemical-mechanical preparation, the roots were split longitudinally, and the coronal, middle and apical thirds were examined. SEM digital photomicrographs were taken at ×1000 magnification to evaluate the amount of smear layer in each root canal third; CUI significantly removed more smear layer than any other irrigant activation protocol (p < 0.05); CUI was more effective in removing the smear layer than the other irrigation protocols. However, none of the irrigation protocols were able to produce root canals completely free from smear layer.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8879012
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-88790122022-02-26 Effectiveness of Different Irrigant Activation Systems on Smear Layer Removal: A Scanning Electron Microscopic Study Miguéns-Vila, Ramón Martín-Biedma, Benjamín Aboy-Pazos, Saleta Uroz-Torres, David Álvarez-Nóvoa, Pablo Dablanca-Blanco, Ana Belén Varela-Aneiros, Iván Castelo-Baz, Pablo J Clin Med Article The aim of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of smear layer removal after the use of different irrigation methods (passive ultrasonic irrigation (PUI), continuous ultrasonic irrigation (CUI), apical negative pressure irrigation and conventional irrigation) using scanning electron microscopy (SEM) as an analytical tool. A total of 100 single-canal teeth were decoronated and randomly divided into five groups (n = 20) according to the irrigation method used: conventional irrigation with front outlet syringe, conventional irrigation with lateral outlet syringe, apical negative pressure irrigation (EndoVac), PUI with Irrisafe and CUI with ProUltra PiezoFlow ultrasonic irrigation needle. Root canal preparation was performed with the ProTaper Gold system up to the F4 instrument, and 5.25% NaOCl was used as an irrigant. After chemical-mechanical preparation, the roots were split longitudinally, and the coronal, middle and apical thirds were examined. SEM digital photomicrographs were taken at ×1000 magnification to evaluate the amount of smear layer in each root canal third; CUI significantly removed more smear layer than any other irrigant activation protocol (p < 0.05); CUI was more effective in removing the smear layer than the other irrigation protocols. However, none of the irrigation protocols were able to produce root canals completely free from smear layer. MDPI 2022-02-15 /pmc/articles/PMC8879012/ /pubmed/35207275 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jcm11041003 Text en © 2022 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Article
Miguéns-Vila, Ramón
Martín-Biedma, Benjamín
Aboy-Pazos, Saleta
Uroz-Torres, David
Álvarez-Nóvoa, Pablo
Dablanca-Blanco, Ana Belén
Varela-Aneiros, Iván
Castelo-Baz, Pablo
Effectiveness of Different Irrigant Activation Systems on Smear Layer Removal: A Scanning Electron Microscopic Study
title Effectiveness of Different Irrigant Activation Systems on Smear Layer Removal: A Scanning Electron Microscopic Study
title_full Effectiveness of Different Irrigant Activation Systems on Smear Layer Removal: A Scanning Electron Microscopic Study
title_fullStr Effectiveness of Different Irrigant Activation Systems on Smear Layer Removal: A Scanning Electron Microscopic Study
title_full_unstemmed Effectiveness of Different Irrigant Activation Systems on Smear Layer Removal: A Scanning Electron Microscopic Study
title_short Effectiveness of Different Irrigant Activation Systems on Smear Layer Removal: A Scanning Electron Microscopic Study
title_sort effectiveness of different irrigant activation systems on smear layer removal: a scanning electron microscopic study
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8879012/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35207275
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jcm11041003
work_keys_str_mv AT miguensvilaramon effectivenessofdifferentirrigantactivationsystemsonsmearlayerremovalascanningelectronmicroscopicstudy
AT martinbiedmabenjamin effectivenessofdifferentirrigantactivationsystemsonsmearlayerremovalascanningelectronmicroscopicstudy
AT aboypazossaleta effectivenessofdifferentirrigantactivationsystemsonsmearlayerremovalascanningelectronmicroscopicstudy
AT uroztorresdavid effectivenessofdifferentirrigantactivationsystemsonsmearlayerremovalascanningelectronmicroscopicstudy
AT alvareznovoapablo effectivenessofdifferentirrigantactivationsystemsonsmearlayerremovalascanningelectronmicroscopicstudy
AT dablancablancoanabelen effectivenessofdifferentirrigantactivationsystemsonsmearlayerremovalascanningelectronmicroscopicstudy
AT varelaaneirosivan effectivenessofdifferentirrigantactivationsystemsonsmearlayerremovalascanningelectronmicroscopicstudy
AT castelobazpablo effectivenessofdifferentirrigantactivationsystemsonsmearlayerremovalascanningelectronmicroscopicstudy