Abstract
Objective: The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of 0.5% peracetic acid solution and 2.5% sodium hypochlorite solution on smear layer removal of root canal walls after rotary instrumentation. Material and methods: Sixty single-rooted human teeth with standardized length had their canals instrumented by three rotary systems (Biorace, MTwo and Endowave), varying the irrigation solution, as follows (n=10): G1- Biorace System + 0.5% peracetic acid solution; G2- Biorace System + 2.5% sodium hypochlorite solution; G3- MTwo System + 0.5% peracetic acid solution; G4- MTwo System + 2.5% sodium hypochlorite solution; G5- Endowave System + 0.5% peracetic acid solution; G6- Endowave System + 2.5% sodium hypochlorite solution. After instrumentation, the roots were cleaved and the dentin walls were evaluated by SEM at x500 and x2000 magnification for assessing the cleaning of the root canals at the cervical, middle and apical thirds. The analyzed area was quantified according to the total number of tubules present and the percentage of open tubules at each region. Data were submitted to statistical analysis by ANOVA and Tukey tests, at the significance level of 5%. Results: There were no statistical significant differences among the experimental groups. In all groups the smear layer removal at cervical and medium thirds was higher than that of apical third. Conclusion: It was concluded that the cleaning obtained at the apical third was lower in all groups studiedand neither the instrumentation technique nor the irrigating solution was able to promote total smear layer removal from root canal walls. KEYWORDS: Peracetic acid; Root canal irrigants; Scanning electron microscopy; Sodium hypochlorite.
Highlights
The irrigant solutions used during biomechanical preparation should display antimicrobial and tissue solvent activity, lubrication and root wall cleaning capacity, enabling a better action of intracanal medication and adequate bonding of the filling material to dentinal walls [1]
During biomechanical preparation, even using proper irrigant solutions and instruments, a residual layer, so-called smear layer, is formed and composed by debris, organic matter and microorganisms adhering to root canal walls, hindering the opening of the dentinal tubules
There were statistical differences among root thirds, in which Tukey test exhibited that the apical third was statistically significant different from the cervical and medium thirds regarding to the percentage of open dentine tubules (Table 4)
Summary
The irrigant solutions used during biomechanical preparation should display antimicrobial and tissue solvent activity, lubrication and root wall cleaning capacity, enabling a better action of intracanal medication and adequate bonding of the filling material to dentinal walls [1]. During biomechanical preparation, even using proper irrigant solutions and instruments, a residual layer, so-called smear layer, is formed and composed by debris, organic matter and microorganisms adhering to root canal walls, hindering the opening of the dentinal tubules. This layer must be removed with the aid of auxiliary chemical substances [2], resulting in the increasing of the dentinal permeability [3,4] and greater bonding of endodontic cements to root canal walls [5]. EDTA, when used for a longer time may cause excessive peritubular and intertubular dentinal erosion and decreasing root dentine microhardness [9,10,11]
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
