| Literature DB >> 32467784 |
Chundangaparambil Pushpahasan Sreedev1, Iswarya Raju1, Karthick Kumaravadivel2, Sebeena Mathew2, Boopathi Thangavel2, Deepa Natesan Thangaraj2.
Abstract
Introduction The main objective of root canal treatment is to eliminate the micro-organism from the root canal system and three-dimensional obturation. The proper cleaning and shaping can be accomplished only by using appropriate instruments and effective irrigants during the root canal treatment. Aim To evaluate the influence of three different final irrigation regimen on depth of penetration of root canal sealers and push-out bond strength of obturation material. Materials and methods Thirty-six extracted single-rooted mandibular premolar human teeth with straight canals were decoronated and instrumented according to groups. Group I: Root canals were irrigated with 3% sodium hypochlorite (NaOCl), then irradiated with 980 nm diode laser (n = 12), Group II: Root canals were irrigated with 3% NaOCl, followed by 17% ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA) (n = 12), Group III: Root canals were irrigated with 3% NaOCl, followed by 10% citric acid (n = 12). In each sample, single cone obturation was done with gutta-percha using AH plus sealer incorporated with rhodamine B dye. After seven days coronal, middle and apical thin cross sections were made for evaluation of dentinal tubule sealer penetration depth and pushout bond strength using confocal laser scanning microscope (CLSM) and universal testing machine, respectively. Statistical analysis among the three groups was done by using Kruskal-Wallis and post hoc test. Results Mean tubular penetration depth between diode laser (136.57 ± 48 µm), EDTA (130.56 ± 53 µm) and citric acid (113.37 ± 34 µm; P < 0.05) showed statistically highly significant results. Pushout bond strength did not differ significantly between diode laser (1.21 ± 0.48 Mpa), EDTA (1.05 ± 0.45 Mpa) and citric acid (0.93 ± 0.44 Mpa; P > 0.05). Conclusion Mean tubular penetration depth of AH plus sealer was better in diode laser than in EDTA and citric acid. Average push-out bond strength of obturation material did not differ significantly between diode laser, EDTA and citric acid.Entities:
Keywords: citric acid; diode laser; edta; endodontic irrigants; root canal sealers
Year: 2020 PMID: 32467784 PMCID: PMC7249766 DOI: 10.7759/cureus.7807
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Cureus ISSN: 2168-8184
Figure 1Confocal microscopic image showing the penetration of different groups.
(A) Citric acid coronal, (B) Citric acid middle, (C) Citric acid apical, (D) Diode coronal, (E) Diode middle, (F) Diode apical, (G) EDTA coronal, (H) EDTA middle, (I) EDTA apical.
EDTA: Ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid
Dentinal tubule penetration depth (µm) in various test groups (p < 0.05).
| Root canal third | Root canal filling materials | ||
| Diode laser | EDTA | Citric acid | |
| Coronal | 185.16 ± 43.43 | 179.07 ± 56.43 | 139.02 ± 35.30 |
| Middle | 131.30 ± 22.02 | 126.48 ± 23.68 | 117.54 ± 15.32 |
| Apical | 93.25 ± 21.22 | 86.14 ± 20.05 | 83.53 ± 19.57 |
| Median | 129.35 | 120.45 | 110.00 |
Bond strength mean values and standard deviations (in MPa) for filling material displacement from intraradicular dentine in each third using the push-out test in specimens (p < 0.05).
| Root canal third | Root canal filling materials | ||
| Diode laser | EDTA | Citric acid | |
| Coronal | 1.41 ± 0.51 | 1.22 ± 0.46 | 1.10 ± 0.42 |
| Middle | 1.22 ± 0.46 | 1.02 ± 0.47 | 0.89 ± 0.45 |
| Apical | 1.02 ± 0.42 | 0.92 ± 0.42 | 0.80 ± 0.42 |
| Median | 1.21 | 1 | 0.99 |
Stereo microscopic evaluation of failure mode after push-out bond strength.
CT: Cervical third; MT: Middle third; AT: Apical third.
| Diode laser | EDTA | Citric acid | |||||||
| Failure mode | CT | MT | AT | CT | MT | AT | CT | MT | AT |
| Adhesive | 30 | 20 | 20 | 30 | 30 | 40 | 40 | 30 | 30 |
| Cohesive | 30 | 30 | 20 | 40 | 30 | 20 | 10 | 30 | 20 |
| Mixed | 40 | 50 | 60 | 30 | 40 | 40 | 50 | 40 | 50 |