medigraphic.com
Órgano Ofical de la Facultad de Estomatología de la Benemérita Universidad Autónoma de Puebla

2015, Number 52

<< Back Next >>

Oral 2015; 16 (52)

Efficacy of two trademarks of chelating to remove the residuallayer

Castro SIA, Morales CV, Castro SGY, Peraza GFJ, Morgan OF, Verdugo BL, López XOL.

Language: Spanish
References: 16
Page: 1274-1278
PDF size: 2418.90 Kb.


ABSTRACT

Smear layer is a detrimental consequence of instrumentation during the preparation of tne root canal beca use ít prevents the penetratian of irrigants, medicaments and filling meteríais inside the denti nal tu bu le and tnat they acnieve tnei r effect in the cnannel wall. Objective. Compare tne effectiveness of twa brands of cnelating and twa irrigation metnods for the removol of tne smear layer. Material and methads. 22 single-rooted tooth organs were standardized to 13mm. Ten pieces were i rrigated with S mear Clear and 1 O witn MD-Cienaser in each group five were irrigated witn syringe and fivewith ultrasound. Tne píeces were observad under a scanning electron microscope to evoluate tne presence of smear layer in the a pica 1 tnird. Statislical methods. lrrigation metnods and brands chelators were compared witn a generalizad linear model and Chi - square tests. Results. MDCieanser was more effective for the removol of smear layer (40 %) comparad with Smear Clear (20 %). By combining brands and method was observed that MD-Ciea nser ond ultrasonic irrigation was superior lo the otner combinations. Conclusions. MD-Cieanser and ultrasonic irrigation is the combination of brand cnelating and irrigation method more effective for removing the Smear layer.


REFERENCES

  1. McCamb, D., Smith, D.C. A preliminary scanning electron microscopic study of root canals alter endadan1ic procedures. J Endad 1975; 1 (2);38--42.

  2. De-Deus, G., Reis, C., Rdel, R., Paciomik. S. Dentine demineralizatian when subjecllldta EDTA with ar withaut various wetting agenm: a co-site digital optical microscapy study. lnt Endod J 2008;41 (4):279-287.

  3. Datto, R.S., Coelha, R.M., Motr:y, E.P., De Lima, M.E., Martins, J.L. Evaluatian of ethylenediamine- tetra-acetic acid (EDTA) solutian and gel for smear layer remOYGI. Aust Endod J 2007; 33(2):62-65.

  4. Saleh, M., Ruyter, I.E., Hapasala, M., Omavik. D. Bacteria! penetratian alang diffllrent roat canal filling materials in the presence ar absence al smear layer. In! EndodJ 2008;41 (1 ):32-40.

  5. Nre¡, H.M., Ferrer, L. C., GonmiN, R.M., Martin, P. F., Ganml&l, L.S. Docalcifying effec:t of 15% EDTA, 15% citric acid, 5% phospharic acid and 2.5% sodium hypoclarite an root canal dentine.lnt Endod J 2008;41 (5):41 8-423.

  6. Garcia D. E."Uso del Acida EtilendiaminaTetraadrtico (EDTA) en la Terapia Endod6ntica' Universidad Centrul de Vene¡uela, 1997. http://www.corlosbaveda.com/Odantolagasfolder/adantoinvítadoold/adontoinvitoda_11.hlm

  7. Martin, H., Cunningham, W. Endosonic endadontics: The uitrasonic synergiotic system. lnt Dent J 1984;34(3) :198-203.

  8. Saares, I.J., Goldberg, F. Endadoncia Técnica y fundamentas.1° ed. edición, Edit. Medica Panamerica, 2005, BuenosAiresArgentina, p.127-1.40.

  9. Zehnder, M. Root conal irrigants. J Endod 2006;32(5):389-J98.

  10. da Silvo, LA, Sanguino, A.C., Rocha, C.T., Leanardo, M.R., Silvo, RA. Scanning electron microocopic preliminory sludy of the efficocy of SmearCiear and EDTA for smear layer remOYGI alterrootconol instrumentotion in perrnanentteeth.J Endad 2008;3.4(12]:15.41-15.4.4.

  11. Borro, 1., Tamós, B., Dfaz-Fiores, V. Esludio in vitro con Microscopio Electrónico de Barrido de distintas métodos de aclivatión de solutiones irrigan""'. Ciant Dent 201 0;7(1]: 45-52.

  12. Hul•mann, M., Rummalin, C., Schofero, F. Root tonal deanliness after praparation with dillerent andadontit hondpiaces ond hand inotnumants: A tomparotive SEM investigation. J Endod 1997; 23(5):301-306.

  13. LM, SJ., Wu, M. K., Wasselink, P.R. The effec:tiveness ol syringa irrigation and ultrosonics ta remove debrislrom simulated imogularities within prapared root canal wolls. lnt Endad J 2004; 37(1 0):672-678.

  14. da Gregario, C., E-, R., Cisner

  15. Kuah, H.G., Lui, J.N., Tseng, P.S.K., Chan, N.N. Tha Elfact of EDTA with and without uh....sonicson removal ofthesmear layer. J Endod 2009;35(3):393-396.

  16. L.ui, J.N., Kuah, H.G., Chen, N.N. Ellact of EDTAwith and without surfactanm aruitrasonics on removol olsmearlayer.J Endod 2007;33(41:472-.475.




2020     |     www.medigraphic.com