K K Wadhwani1, A P Tikku, Anil Chandra, Vijay Kumar Shakya. 1. Department of Conservative Dentistry & Endodontics, Faculty of Dental Sciences, Chhatrapati Shahuji Maharaj Medical University (earlier KGMC), Lucknow, India. drkkwadhwani@yahoo.com
Abstract
AIM: The aim of the study was to evaluate the ability of 17% ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA) solution and 19% EDTA gel to remove debris, and smear layer produced during root canal preparation with two NiTi files systems, Mtwo and Protaper. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twenty freshly extracted human anterior teeth with single root canal were collected. The crowns were sectioned at the cemento-enamel junction, and working length was measured. These samples were randomly divided into four groups of five samples each. In each group, 2 ml of 3 % sodium hypochlorite solution was used with first instrument. The groupings were as follows. Group 1: 2 ml of 17% EDTA solution and 2 ml of 3% NaOCl were used alternatively each time a new file was employed. This group was prepared with Mtwo rotary files. Group 2: The samples in this group was prepared with Mtwo rotary files. EDTA gel (19%) was used and the samples were irrigated with 2 ml of 3% NaOCl. NaOCl and EDTA gel were used alternatively. Group 3: Five samples were prepared with Protaper file. Irrigation regime was the same as in Group 1. Group 4: Five samples were prepared with Protaper files and irrigation regime was the same as in Group 2. SEM study was done and the collected data were submitted for statistical analysis. RESULTS: There was no statistically significant difference with the varied instruments used (Mtwo and Protaper files), and 17% EDTA solution and 19% EDTA gel. CONCLUSION: Both the NITI instruments produced a similar dentin surface on root canal wall when used with EDTA gel and EDTA solution.
AIM: The aim of the study was to evaluate the ability of 17% ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA) solution and 19% EDTA gel to remove debris, and smear layer produced during root canal preparation with two NiTi files systems, Mtwo and Protaper. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twenty freshly extracted human anterior teeth with single root canal were collected. The crowns were sectioned at the cemento-enamel junction, and working length was measured. These samples were randomly divided into four groups of five samples each. In each group, 2 ml of 3 % sodium hypochlorite solution was used with first instrument. The groupings were as follows. Group 1: 2 ml of 17% EDTA solution and 2 ml of 3% NaOCl were used alternatively each time a new file was employed. This group was prepared with Mtwo rotary files. Group 2: The samples in this group was prepared with Mtwo rotary files. EDTA gel (19%) was used and the samples were irrigated with 2 ml of 3% NaOCl. NaOCl and EDTA gel were used alternatively. Group 3: Five samples were prepared with Protaper file. Irrigation regime was the same as in Group 1. Group 4: Five samples were prepared with Protaper files and irrigation regime was the same as in Group 2. SEM study was done and the collected data were submitted for statistical analysis. RESULTS: There was no statistically significant difference with the varied instruments used (Mtwo and Protaper files), and 17% EDTA solution and 19% EDTA gel. CONCLUSION: Both the NITI instruments produced a similar dentin surface on root canal wall when used with EDTA gel and EDTA solution.
Authors: Margaret Soo Yee Chia; Abhishek Parolia; Benjamin Syek Hur Lim; Jayakumar Jayaraman; Isabel Cristina Celerino de Moraes Porto Journal: Restor Dent Endod Date: 2020-05-21