Root Canal Smear Layer Research Articles

A Comparative Study on the Shaping Ability and Cleaning Efficiency of Two Different Single-File Systems, Reciprocating Wave One Versus Continuous Rotation F360, Evaluated by Scanning Electron Microscope: An In Vitro Study.

Background: In endodontics, the three processes of biomechanical preparation, disinfection, and obturation are each essential. The electron microprobe and scanning electron microscope (SEM) allowed for the detection and identification of the smear layer and debris. The purpose of the current investigation was to use a scanning electron microscope to evaluate the relative merits of two single-file systems, the reciprocating WaveOne and the continuous motion F360 files, in the cleaning and contouring of root canals in removed teeth. Materials and method: The 50 central maxillary permanent teeth Data was gathered from the Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery Division at Sri Ganganagar's Maharaja Ganga Singh Dental College and Research Centre for a number of reasons. Group A followed the manufacturer's guidelines for using the WaveOne instrument, whereas Group B utilised the F360. Reciprocating motion WaveOne system (group A) and continuous motion F360 system (group B) root canals were scored at three levels: coronal third, middle third, and apical third (group B). SPSS version 22 was used for the data analysis. The data were examined using the chi-square test and the one-way analysis of variance. Results: A greater quantity of smear layer was found in the apical third, whereas better results were achieved in the coronal and middle thirds. When compared to the F360 file system, the WaveOne file system is subpar when it comes to clearing the canal of debris. While both groups showed a large amount of debris in the apical third, outcomes were somewhat better in the coronal and middle thirds. Conclusion: The WaveOne and F360 file systems were both more effective in removing trash from the coronal and middle thirds of the disc than they were from the apical thirds. In comparison to the continuous motion F360 file system, WaveOne files demonstrated a statistically significant reduction in the amount of debris cleared from root canals in all three root zone thirds (coronal, middle, and apical). The reciprocating action of the WaveOne file system, in contrast to the continuous motion of the F360 file system, resulted in more extensive cleaning of the root canal smear layer in the coronal and middle thirds and less thorough cleaning in the apical thirds of the canal.

Evaluation of the Efficacy of Different Irrigation Systems on the Removal of Root Canal Smear Layer: A Scanning Electron Microscopic Study

Irrigation represents a crucial step in endodontics for bacteria disinfection and smear layer removal. Several irrigation strategies have been proposed, although their effects are controversial. This study aims to assess the comparison of four different irrigation systems on the smear layer removal utilizing scanning electron microscopy (SEM). Forty sound monoradicular teeth were collected and casually allocated into four groups (n = 10): Group A, conventional irrigation; Group B, IrriFlex irrigation; Group C, ultrasonic irrigation system; Group D, apical negative pressure irrigation. After chemo-mechanical preparation and longitudinal root separation, the three root thirds were analyzed by SEM. Micrographs were carried out at ×2000 to analyze the smear layer residual in each third of the root canal. Statistically significant differences were found between Group A and Group D (p < 0.05). Groups B and C showed satisfactory results in the coronal and middle thirds, while Group D was the only system that achieved satisfactory results in the apical third. However, the complete smear layer removal in the root canal was never achieved with any of the four systems tested. In conclusion, among the four tested irrigation systems, the greatest efficacy on smear layer removal was reached by Group D.

Avaliação ex vivo da eficácia do XP-endo Finisher na remoção de smear layer do canal radicular

ABSTRACT Objective: The aim of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of XP-endo Finisher (XP) on removal of the smear layer in root canals by comparing different irrigation protocols. Methods: Seventy-two human single-rooted teeth were similarly instrumented using R25 Reciproc files (VDW, Munich, Germany) applied in reciprocating mode with a VDW GOLD endo motor (VDW, Munich, Germany). The working length was determined at 1 mm short of the apical foramen. The canals were irrigated with 5 mL of 2.5% sodium hypochlorite during instrumentation. The teeth were divided at random into six groups (n=12). A control group, which was not submitted to the final irrigation protocol, and five experimental groups with different irrigants and agitation techniques: EDTA/File, EDTA/XP, EDTA/Passive Ultrasonic Irrigation (PUI), Distilled Water (DW)/XP, and DW/PUI). Smear layer removal quality scores were assessed in the apical, middle, and cervical thirds of the root canal based on images obtained by scanning electron microscopy. Data were analyzed using the Kruskal-Wallis test, followed by two-by-two comparisons with the Dunn test (α=5%). Results: EDTA/File, EDTA/PUI, and EDTA/XP groups demonstrated significantly lower scores than the other groups (P<0.05) in all thirds evaluated. No significant difference was observed between the groups in which distilled water was used and the control group in all thirds evaluated (P> 0.05). Conclusion: The XP-endo Finisher file did not increase the efficiency of EDTA in removal of the smear layer in root canals.

Effectiveness of brown algae extract (Sargassum sp) 15% in dissolving root canal smear layer (a SEM study)

ObjectiveTo determine the ability of brown algae (Sargassum sp) extract 15% in dissolving root canal smear layer. MethodsThis study was an experimental laboratory with post-test only control group design. There were four groups of irrigation material, aquadest (Group 1); EDTA 17% (Group 2), NaOCL 2.5% (Group 3) and brown algae extract (Sargassum sp) 15% (Group 4). Each group consists of 6 samples (n=6). The cleanliness of root canal from the smear layer was checked using Crown Down Pressureless (CDP) technique with Protaper Next files and irrigated with each of irrigation material. The root canal hygiene was checked using Scanning Electron Microscopic (SEM) method and data were analyzed with the Kruskal Wallis test. ResultsRoot canals that were irrigated using brown algae (Sargassum sp) extract 15% showed a significant decrease of smear layer compared to other groups (p<0.05) either in 1/3 middle portion or 1/3 apical portion. ConclusionBrown algae (Sargassum sp) extract 15% was more effective to clean smear layer on root canal wall compared to NaOCl 2.5% but did not show a significant difference compared to EDTA 17%.

The differences in root canal smear layer removal between 6,25% pineapple (Ananas comocus L. Merr.) peel extract and 17% Ethylene diamine tetra-acetic acid

Background: The smear layer is attached to dentine and occludes the orifice and, consequently, must be removed in order to improve the success of inroot canal treatment. The ideal irrigation material removes both the organic and inorganic smear layers. Ethylene diamine tetra-acetic acid (EDTA) is one of the most commonly used root canal irrigation materials, but removes only inorganic smear layer. To overcome this problem, Pineapple (Ananas comosus L. Merr.) peel extract, which contains saponins, bromelain, polyphenol and flavonoid, is used during root canal irrigation. Purpose: The study aimed to analyze the difference in smear layer removal between the use of 6.25% pineapple peel extract and 17% EDTA. Methods: 27 samples of mandibular premolar teeth with straight root canals were divided randomly into three groups (n = 9) and subsequently prepared using protaper. Irrigation was performed on the control group (aquadest), group I (17% EDTA) and group II (6.25% pineapple peel extract). The samples were dried, temporarily compressed and cut horizontally from the apical to the coronal. Samples were fixed with holder before the smear layer was observed through a scanning electron microscope (SEM). The resulting data was analyzed by means of an ANOVA test. Results: The highest score of root canal hygiene was recorded by group II, followed by group I and, finally, the control group. There were significant differences between the groups (p&lt; 0.000). Conclusion: 6.25% pineapple peel extract produces a higher smear layer removal effect than 17%EDTA on the apical 1/3 of the root canal.

Time-dependent effect of various irrigants for root canal on smear layer removal

Background:Existence of smear layer in root canals caused by instrumentation is believed to prevent penetration of irrigating agents, thereby resulting in endodontic treatment.Aims and Objectives:To compare and evaluate the effectiveness of two irrigants: 17% ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA) and mixture of tetracycline isomer, an acid, and a detergent (MTAD) as final agents for eliminating the smear layer.Materials and Methods:We included 50 human lower premolar teeth whose crowns were sectioned at cementoenamel junction. The sample was randomly grouped into five groups, each with 10 teeth. Group 1: 1 mL of 17% EDTA as final rinse for 1 min, Group 2: 1 mL of 17% EDTA for 30 s, Group 3: 5 mL of MTAD for 2.5 min, Group 4: 5 mL of MTAD for 5 min, and Group 5: saline. The specimens were sectioned vertically all along the long axis and fixed on an aluminum stub for gold ion sputtering. Scanning electron microscope was used to observe the specimens, and photomicrographs were taken at coronal, middle, and apical thirds of canal, and assessed by Torabinejad scoring system by two examiners, and the observations were analyzed statistically.Results:When Group 1 and Group 2 and Groups 3 and 4 were compared, we found a significant variation in removal of smear layer at cervical and middle thirds, and insignificant difference at apical third. In comparison with EDTA and saline, MTAD was more efficient significantly in middle and cervical thirds and insignificant at apical third.Conclusion:MTAD is an efficient irrigant for removing smear layer than EDTA and saline.

Evaluation of root canal smear layer removal by two types of lasers: A scanning electron microscopy study

Abstract Objective: This study was to compare the effects of Erbium: Yttrium-Aluminium-Garnet (Er: YAG), and Neodimium: Yttrium-Aluminium-Garnet (Nd: YAG) lasers on removing the smear layer using scanning electron microscopy. Background: Removing Smear layer and exposure of dentinal tubules facilitate a tight-fitting root canal filling, which is necessary for a successful endodontic treatment and one of the proposed methods for removing the smear layer is the use of lasers. Materials and Methods: In this experimental study, 55 human single-rooted teeth were examined. Instrumentation was done using the step-back technique with hand files up to file #40 at the apical area and file #80 at the coronal area. The samples were divided into three groups: Samples irradiated by the Er: YAG laser (1 W, 10 Hz, 130.7 J/cm2 ) in Group 1 (n=25), the Nd: YAG laser (2 W, 15 Hz, 188.25 J/cm2 ) in Group 2 (n=25) and samples irrigated by 5.25% NaOCl as the control in Group 3 (n=5). Next, roots were bisected longitudinally and prepared for scanning electron microscopy. Data were analyzed using the Kruskal-Wallis, Mann-Whitney, Friedman and Wilcoxon tests (P&lt;0.05). Results: The Er: YAG laser can remove more of the smear layer from the root canal wall than the Nd: YAG laser (P=0.000). Comparisons between three regions showed that both of the lasers proved less efficient in apical parts of the root canal. Conclusion: Based on the findings of the present study, irradiation by the Er: YAG laser was more effective in smear layer removal than the Nd: YAG laser.

The effect of the irrigant QMix on removal of canal wall smear layer: an ex vivo study

The aim of this study is to evaluate the effectiveness over application time of different formulations of a novel endodontic irrigant (QMix™ 2in1) composed of a polyaminocarboxylic acid chelating agent, a bisbiguanide antimicrobial agent, a surfactant and deionized water to remove the root canal smear layer and expose patent dentinal tubules compared to a standard solution of 17% EDTA. Eighty human tooth roots from extracted, single-rooted teeth were instrumented (size 40.06) using 0.2 mL of sodium hypochlorite (6.15%) between each file size with a 3 mL water rinse after final instrumentation. Eight groups of 10 roots were irrigated with 3 mL of different formulations of QMix: QMix A, QMix B, and QMix C, or 17% EDTA for 60 and 90 s, respectively, then rinsed with 5 mL of sterile water. The roots were irrigated using a standard irrigation syringe and a 30 ga side-vent needle with an apical-coronal motion to within 1 mm of the working length. The coronal, middle and apical thirds of one canal surface of each root was evaluated at 1000× using scanning electron microscopy. The presence of smear layer was scored using a 5-point scale. Data were analyzed with the Kruskal-Wallis rank sums test, the Steel-Dwass, all-pairs comparison test, and the Steel method (with control) test. Irrigant type was highly significant (p < 0.007). Combined 60 and 90 s exposure data indicated QMix A (p = 0.014) and QMix C (p = 0.028) were superior to EDTA. While at the 90 s exposure time, smear layer removal by solutions QMix A (p = 0.043), QMix B (p = 0.018), and QMix C (p = 0.011) was superior to EDTA. All irrigants removed smear layer more effectively at the coronal and middle levels compared to the apical level (p < 0.001). Analysis showed all three QMix formulations were superior to EDTA in smear layer removal and exposure of dentinal tubules in the root canal system in single-rooted teeth.

Evaluation of Smear Layer: A Comparison of Automated Image Analysis versus Expert Observers

Consistent and reproducible evaluation techniques of the smear layer in root canals in scanning electron microscopy studies are needed when comparing various instruments and techniques. In this study, the performance of 3 experienced blinded evaluators applying the Hulsmann technique was compared with a digital analysis method. Smear layer in the apical third of root canals of 35 freshly extracted teeth prepared by using nickel-titanium rotary instruments, Er:YAG and Er,Cr:YSGG lasers was scored on coded images. There was good agreement between the digital analysis method and the different evaluators (kappa analysis) across the range of the Hulsmann scores. Image analysis might be useful for evaluating the degree of smear layer removal in endodontic research.

The role of Carisolv™ and different auxiliary chemical substances in the removal of bovine root canal smear layer

To evaluate the effectiveness of Carisolv and different auxiliary chemical substances in root canal smear layer (SL) removal. SL was produced in the centre of 40 hemi-disks of bovine root dentine. The samples were divided into four irrigation groups (G): GI (control) - 0.9% NaCl; GII - 1% NaOCl + 0.9% NaCl; GIII - Carisolv + 0.9% NaCl; GIV - 1% NaOCl + 10% citric acid solution + 0.9% NaCl. The photomicrographs (SEM analysis) were coded (0 - absence of SL; 1 - moderate SL; 2 - dense SL with visible tubules; 3 - dense SL with no visible tubules). GIV was more effective in SL removal (P < 0.01). It should be noted that GI and GIII obtained score 3 in 100% of the samples (P > 0.01). NaOHCl, citric acid and NaCl solutions, when used together, presented a better performance in the removal of SL when compared to the other solutions.