Paredes VJ, Gradilla MI, Mondaca JM, Jiménez EFJ, Manriquez QMI

Language: Spanish
References: 18
Page: 30-34
PDF size: 355.20 Kb.

ABSTRACT

Aim. This study was conducted to identify the effectiveness of the system, to determine the presence or the absence of mud layer or smear layer
Study design. A sample of 60 canals with moderate curvature (as classified by Schneider). 60 permanent teeth were used with fully formed roots. X-rays were taken in planes mesio-distal and buco-lingual to verify the presence of permeable canals.
Methodology. All the samples were placed in plastic buckets full of polivinilsiloxane to prevent the escape of the irrigant agent.
Results. By using 2.5% NaOCl irrigation as final solution was found in the cervical and middle thirds a moderate amount of smear layer, with dentine tubules completely closed and compact. The apical third presented lot of smear layer and mud layer and the tubes were completely closed.
Conclussion. When using the Endo-Vac and NaOCl to 5.25% and 17% EDTA, dentinal tubes were found open and compact, minimum smear layer in the three thirds. Endo Vac System helps to achieve significant clean canal after instrumentation.

REFERENCES

1. Clinical implication of the smear layer in endodontics. Torabinejad et al. OOO 94(6), Dec 2002.

2. Ciencia endodóntica. Carlos Estrela. Artes Médicas Latinoamérica 1ª edición, 2005.

3. Hydrodynamic disinfection: tsunami endodontics. Ruddle CJ. Dent Today. 2007 May; 26(5):110, 112, 114-7.

4. A new solution for the removal of the smear layer. Torabinejad et al. JOE 29(3), March 2003.

5. Quantitative analysis of the solubilizing action of MTAD, sodium hypoclorite, and EDTA on bovine pulp and dentin. Beltz, R.E., Torabinejad M, Pouresmail M. JOE 29(5), May 2003.

6. Root canal irrigants. Matthias Zehnder. JOE 32(5), May 2006.

7. Evaluation of the canal cleanliness and smear layer removal after the use of the Quantec-E irrigation system and suringe: A comparative scanning electron microscope study. Oral Surg, Oral Med, Oral Path, Oral Radiol, Endod. 2003; 96:614-7.

8. Influence of Irrigating Needle-Tip Designs in Removing Bacteria Inoculated Into Instrumented Root Canals Measured Using Single-Tube Luminometer. Thilla Sekar Vinothkumar et. al. Journal of Endodontic. Vol 33 (6), June 2007.

9. Efficacy of a New Brush-Covered Irrigation Needle in Removing Root Canal Debris: A Scanning Electron Microscopic Study. Solaiman M. Al- Hadlaq et al. Journal of Endodontics Vol 32 (12), December 2006.

10. Comparisson of the EndoVac System to Needle Irrigation of Root Canals. Benjamin A. Nielsen & J. Craig Baumgartner. Journal of Endodontics. Vol 33 (5) May 2007.

11. Comparisson of the Efficacy of Three Chelating Agents in Smear Layer Removal. Sedigheh Khedmat & Noushin Shokouhinejad. Journal of Endodontics. Article in press.

12. A Comparative Study of Smear Layer Removal Using Different Salts of EDTA. Michael S. O’Connell et al. Journal of Endodontics. Vol. 26 (12) December 2000.

13. Analysis of the Effect of Dilution on the Necrotic Tissue Dissolution Property of Sodium Hypochlorite. Hand et al. JOE Vol. 4(2), Feb 1978.

14. The Effect of Exposure to Irrigant Solutions on Apical Dentin Biofilms In Vitro. Clegg et al. JOE Vol 32(5) May 2006.

15. An ex vivo evaluation of a new root canal irrigation technique with intracanal aspiration.Y. Fukumoto, et. al. International Endodontic Journal, 39, 93–99, 2006.

16. The EndoVac Method of Endodontic Irrigation: Safety First.G. John Schoeffel. Dent Today. 2007 Oct;26(10):92, 94, 96.

17. The EndoVac Method of Endodontic Irrigation, Part 2-Efficacy. G. John Schoeffel. Dent Today. 2008 Jan;27(1):82, 84, 86-7.

18. A new solution for the removal of the smear layer. Torabinejad et al. Journal of Endodontics. Vol 29(3), March 2003.