OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to analyze the influence of different volumes of 17% EDTA for final rinse on smear layer removal on the different areas of the root canal. STUDY DESIGN: Forty single-rooted teeth were instrumented using rotary instruments. The teeth were divided into 3 test groups according to the EDTA volume for final rinse (5 mL, 10 mL, 15 mL) and 1 control group (10 mL of 1% sodium hypochlorite). The roots were axially split into halves, and the smear layer removal from the canals was determined under scanning electron microscope. The data were analyzed using Kruskal Wallis and Dunn tests. RESULTS: The 3 experimental groups showed no statistical difference (P > .05); however, when the test groups were compared to the control group statistically significant differences were found (P < .01). The root canal wall surfaces of teeth in the control group showed the presence of heavy smear layer through the entire length of the root canals. The other groups showed mainly smear layer-free surfaces or a small amount of debris. When coronal, middle and apical thirds were compared, there was no statistically significant difference (P > .05). CONCLUSIONS: Based on the results, it appears that a final rinse with 5 mL of EDTA per canal provides good smear layer removal, with root canal walls free of debris and mostly open dentinal tubules in all areas.
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to analyze the influence of different volumes of 17% EDTA for final rinse on smear layer removal on the different areas of the root canal. STUDY DESIGN: Forty single-rooted teeth were instrumented using rotary instruments. The teeth were divided into 3 test groups according to the EDTA volume for final rinse (5 mL, 10 mL, 15 mL) and 1 control group (10 mL of 1% sodium hypochlorite). The roots were axially split into halves, and the smear layer removal from the canals was determined under scanning electron microscope. The data were analyzed using Kruskal Wallis and Dunn tests. RESULTS: The 3 experimental groups showed no statistical difference (P > .05); however, when the test groups were compared to the control group statistically significant differences were found (P < .01). The root canal wall surfaces of teeth in the control group showed the presence of heavy smear layer through the entire length of the root canals. The other groups showed mainly smear layer-free surfaces or a small amount of debris. When coronal, middle and apical thirds were compared, there was no statistically significant difference (P > .05). CONCLUSIONS: Based on the results, it appears that a final rinse with 5 mL of EDTA per canal provides good smear layer removal, with root canal walls free of debris and mostly open dentinal tubules in all areas.
Authors: Rejitha R Kamalasanan; Swapna V Devarasanahalli; Ranjini M Aswathanarayana; K Rashmi; Yashwanth Gowda; Roopa R Nadig Journal: J Clin Diagn Res Date: 2017-05-01
Authors: Juan Gonzalo Olivieri; Marc García Font; Eva Stöber; Joan de Ribot; Montse Mercadé; Fernando Duran-Sindreu Journal: J Dent Sci Date: 2016-05-13 Impact factor: 2.080