INTRODUCTION: There is ongoing debate regarding the ideal sequence, volume, and concentration of irrigants, length of time for irrigation, and irrigation technique to achieve debridement of the root canal system. The aim of this study was to verify the impact of the final rinse technique on smear layer removal ability of 17% ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA). METHODS: Sixteen single-rooted human teeth were instrumented and divided into 2 groups at the final rinse step according to the following final rinse techniques used: continuous rinse group, continuous rinse with EDTA during 3 minutes, and rinse and soaking group, rinse with 1 mL of EDTA, soaking of the canal for 2 minutes and 30 seconds, and rinse completion with the remaining 4 mL for 30 seconds. The specimens were split lengthwise and observed under scanning electron microscope. RESULTS: Data were analyzed with Kruskal-Wallis and Dunn tests. The continuous rinse group presented more debris-free surfaces when compared with the rinse and soaking group (P<.01). When the root canal areas were compared within the groups, no statistical differences were found (P>.05). CONCLUSIONS: It can be concluded that a continuous rinse with 5 mL of EDTA for 3 minutes can more efficiently remove the smear layer from root canal walls. Crown Copyright (c) 2010. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
INTRODUCTION: There is ongoing debate regarding the ideal sequence, volume, and concentration of irrigants, length of time for irrigation, and irrigation technique to achieve debridement of the root canal system. The aim of this study was to verify the impact of the final rinse technique on smear layer removal ability of 17% ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA). METHODS: Sixteen single-rooted human teeth were instrumented and divided into 2 groups at the final rinse step according to the following final rinse techniques used: continuous rinse group, continuous rinse with EDTA during 3 minutes, and rinse and soaking group, rinse with 1 mL of EDTA, soaking of the canal for 2 minutes and 30 seconds, and rinse completion with the remaining 4 mL for 30 seconds. The specimens were split lengthwise and observed under scanning electron microscope. RESULTS: Data were analyzed with Kruskal-Wallis and Dunn tests. The continuous rinse group presented more debris-free surfaces when compared with the rinse and soaking group (P<.01). When the root canal areas were compared within the groups, no statistical differences were found (P>.05). CONCLUSIONS: It can be concluded that a continuous rinse with 5 mL of EDTA for 3 minutes can more efficiently remove the smear layer from root canal walls. Crown Copyright (c) 2010. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.