Ramírez SN, Andrade VLM, Silva-Herzog D, Méndez GMV

Language: Spanish
References: 14
Page: 177-182
PDF size: 181.77 Kb.

ABSTRACT

Objective: The purpose of this study was to compare 4 substances as coadjuvants in removing the smear layer from de apical third. Material and methods: The substances studied are experimental coadjuvant liquid form, experimental coadjuvant gel form, Glyde an file prep. This was performed using scanning electron microscope. One hundred roots (from central maxillary incisors and distal roots of maxillary first molars) were divided into five group: Group A: negative control. Only files were used, no irrigation or coadjuvant; group positive control. Group B: Files were used and also 5.25% of sodium hypochlorite; Group C: files were used and Glyde and 1% of sodio hypochlorite; Group D: files were used and liquid coadjuvant and 1% sodium hypochlorite; Group E: files were used and gel coadjuvant and 1% sodium hypochlorite. Results: Statistical analysis with Rome system was used to evaluate smear layer removal, the analysis was performed with a Fisher exact test. There was no significant statistical difference between Glyde, experimental coadjuvant liquid form an experimental coadjuvant gel form. Both the liquid and gel performed the same as Glyde (p = 0.4349). There was no statistical difference between the liquid form or the gel (p = 1.0000).

REFERENCES

1. Cohen S, Burns R. Endodoncia. Los caminos de la pulpa. 4ta Edición. Editorial Médica Panamericana. Buenos Aires. 1988.

2. Silva-Herzog D, Yacamán F. Irrigación en endodoncia y su importancia clínica. Revista ADM 1991; XLVIII/3: 140.150.

3. McComb D, Smith DC. A preliminary scanning electron microscopic study of the root canals after endodontic procedures. Journal of Endodontics 1975; 42: 238-242.

4. Schilder H. Cleaning and shaping the root canal. Clínicas Dentales de Norteamérica 1974; 18: 269.

5. Bystrom A, Sundqvist G. Bacteriologic evaluation of the efficacy of mechanical root canal instrumentation in endodontic therapy. Journal Dental Research Scand 1981; 89: 321-328

6. O´Connell SM et al. A comparative study of smear layer removal using different salts of EDTA. Journal of Endodontics 2000; 26(12): 739-743.

7. Hülsamnn M y cols. Limpieza de los conductos después de la preparación con diferentes piezas e instrumentos de mano endodónticos: una investigación comparativa de MEB. Journal of Endodontics 1997; 23(5): 301-306.

8. Segura EJJ y cols. La sal disódica de EDTA inhibe la adhesión del péptido intestinal vasoactivo a las membranas de los macrófagos: implicaciones endodónticas. Revista de Endodoncia 1996; 14(4).

9. Segura EJJ y cols. El ácido etilendiaminotetraascético EDTA y su uso en endodoncia. Revista de Endodoncia 1997; 15(2).

10. Fraser JG. Chelanting agents: their softening effect on root canal dentin. Oral Surgery 1989; 37(5): 803-811.

11. Stewart G, Kapsimalis G, Rappapport H. EDTA and urea peroxide for root canal preparation. Journal American Dental Association 1969; 78: 335-341.

12. Glyde File Prep. Root Canal Conditioner. Denstply International Web Site. http//www.maillefer.com/glyde.htm

13. Semra C, Server A. Time-dependent effects of EDTA on dentin structures. Journal of Endodontics 2002; 28(1): 17-19.

14. Grandini S et al. Evaluation of Glyde File Prep in combination with sodium hipochlorite as a root canal irrigant. Journal of Endodontics 2002; 28(4): 300-303.