Literature DB >> 25960002

Effect of Ultrasonic Activation of Irrigants on Smear Layer Removal.

Tamer F Schmidt1, Cleonice S Teixeira1, Mara C S Felippe1, Wilson T Felippe1, David H Pashley2, Eduardo A Bortoluzzi3.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: The objective of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of passive ultrasonic irrigation (PUI) with 17% EDTA and 1% NaOCl solutions on smear layer removal.
METHODS: Root canal preparations of 32 human teeth were performed with the ProTaper system. Next, they were longitudinally fractured to permit quantitation of smear layer creation from the cervical, middle, and apical thirds of the roots by using scanning electron microscopy. After reassembling the fractured tooth halves, they were divided into 4 groups according to different final irrigation protocols: group1, EDTA + NaOCl; group 2, EDTA with PUI + NaOCl; group 3, EDTA + NaOCl with PUI; and group 4, EDTA + NaOCl, both with PUI. After irrigation, the tooth halves were separated to permit imaging the same areas by scanning electron microscopy, and a percentage of opened dentinal tubules in irrigated areas as a percent of the total area was obtained. The results were submitted to Kruskal-Wallis, analysis of variance, and Bonferroni tests (α = 0.05).
RESULTS: The cervical third of the samples from all groups showed higher percentage of smear layer removal and open dentinal tubule areas, followed by the middle and apical thirds. Among the irrigation groups, there were statistically significant differences in cervical third between group 2 and group 4 samples, with the highest and lowest percentage of smear layer removal, respectively.
CONCLUSIONS: PUI by using 1% NaOCl and ultrasonic tip placed within 1 mm of the apical foramen did not show higher efficacy in smear layer removal compared with conventional irrigation.
Copyright © 2015 American Association of Endodontists. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Irrigation; SEM; passive ultrasonic irrigation; smear layer

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2015        PMID: 25960002     DOI: 10.1016/j.joen.2015.03.023

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Endod        ISSN: 0099-2399            Impact factor:   4.171


  15 in total

1.  Canal cleanliness using different irrigation activation systems: a SEM evaluation.

Authors:  K Urban; D Donnermeyer; Edgar Schäfer; S Bürklein
Journal:  Clin Oral Investig       Date:  2017-02-09       Impact factor: 3.573

2.  FESEM evaluation of smear layer removal using different irrigant activation methods (EndoActivator, EndoVac, PUI and LAI). An in vitro study.

Authors:  Manuele Mancini; Loredana Cerroni; Lorenzo Iorio; Lorenzo Dall'Asta; Luigi Cianconi
Journal:  Clin Oral Investig       Date:  2017-07-18       Impact factor: 3.573

Review 3.  Postoperative pain in root canal treatment with ultrasonic versus conventional irrigation: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Authors:  Lucas Orbolato Chalub; Gabriel Pereira Nunes; Túlio Morandin Ferrisse; Henrico Badaoui Strazzi-Sahyon; Paulo Henrique Dos Santos; João Eduardo Gomes-Filho; Luciano Tavares Angelo Cintra; Gustavo Sivieri-Araujo
Journal:  Clin Oral Investig       Date:  2022-01-28       Impact factor: 3.606

4.  Ultrasonic activation of irrigants increases growth factor release from human dentine.

Authors:  M Widbiller; A Eidt; K-A Hiller; W Buchalla; G Schmalz; K M Galler
Journal:  Clin Oral Investig       Date:  2016-04-25       Impact factor: 3.573

5.  Radiological Evaluation of Penetration of the Irrigant according to Three Endodontic Irrigation Techniques.

Authors:  Said Dhaimy; Sara Imdary; Sara Dhoum; Imane Benkiran; Amal El Ouazzani
Journal:  Int J Dent       Date:  2016-06-28

6.  Outcomes of Endodontic Therapy Comparing Conventional Sodium Hypochlorite Irrigation with Passive Ultrasonic Irrigation Using Sodium Hypochlorite and Ethylenediaminetetraacetate. A Retrospective Analysis.

Authors:  Moritz Hertel; Katja Sommer; Eckehard Kostka; Sandra Maria Imiolczyk; Husam Ballout; Saskia Preissner
Journal:  Open Dent J       Date:  2016-08-12

7.  Efficacy of passive ultrasonic irrigation, continuous ultrasonic irrigation versus irrigation with reciprocating activation device in penetration into main and simulated lateral canals.

Authors:  Caio Cesar Souza; Carlos Eduardo Bueno; Augusto Shoji Kato; Ana Grasiela Limoeiro; Carlos Eduardo Fontana; Rina Andrea Pelegrine
Journal:  J Conserv Dent       Date:  2019 Mar-Apr

8.  Influence of reuse and cervical preflaring on the fracture strength of reciprocating instruments.

Authors:  Claudio Maniglia-Ferreira; Fabio de Almeida Gomes; Tatyana Ximenes; Murilo Alves Teixeira Neto; Thiane Elys Arruda; Giovani Gonçalves Ribamar; Luis Flávio Gaspar Herculano
Journal:  Eur J Dent       Date:  2017 Jan-Mar

9.  Effect of ultrasonic activation on calcium ion quantification, smear layer removal, and canal cleaning efficacy of demineralizing irrigants.

Authors:  Naren Ramachandran; Rajesh Podar; Shishir Singh; Gaurav Kulkarni; Shifali Dadu
Journal:  J Conserv Dent       Date:  2018 Sep-Oct

10.  Root Preparation of Deciduous Teeth: Efficacy of WaveOne and ProTaper Systems with and without Passive Ultrasonic Irrigation.

Authors:  Bruno Marques da Silva; Fabrício Scaini; Flávia Sens Fagundes Tomazinho; Carla Castiglia Gonzaga; Marilisa Carneiro Leão Gabardo; Flares Baratto-Filho
Journal:  Iran Endod J       Date:  2018
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.