Debris and smear removal in flattened root canals after use of different irrigant agitation protocols


Autoria(s): Ribeiro, Eduardo Milani; Sousa, Yara T. C. Silva; Gabriel, Aline Evangelista de Souza; Sousa Neto, Manoel Damião de; Lorencetti, Karina Torales; Silva, Silvio Rocha Correa
Contribuinte(s)

UNIVERSIDADE DE SÃO PAULO

Data(s)

05/11/2013

05/11/2013

2012

Resumo

Scanning electron microscopy (SEM) can be used to analyze the presence of debris and smear layer on the internal walls of root canal. This study evaluated the debris and smear removal in flattened root canals using SEM after use of different irrigant agitation protocols. Fifty mandibular incisors were distributed into five groups (n = 10) according to the irrigant agitation protocol used during chemomechanical preparation: conventional syringe irrigation with NaviTip needle (no activation), active scrubbing of irrigant with brush-covered NaviTip FX needle, manual dynamic irrigation, continuous passive ultrasonic irrigation, and apical negative pressure irrigation (EndoVac system). Canals were irrigated with 5 mL of 2.5% NaOCl at each change of instrument and received a final flush with 17% EDTA for 1 min. After instrumentation, the roots were split longitudinally and SEM micrographs at x 100 and x 1,000 were taken to evaluate the amount of debris and smear layer, respectively, in each third. Data were analyzed by KruskalWallis and Dunn's post-hoc tests (a = 5%). Manual dynamic activation left significantly (p < 0.05) more debris inside the canals than the other protocols, while ultrasonic irrigation and EndoVac were the most effective (p < 0.05) for debris removal. Regarding the removal of smear layer, there was no statistically significant difference (p > 0.05) either among the irrigant agitation protocols or between the protocolcanal third interactions. Although none of the irrigant agitation protocols completely removed debris and smear layer from flattened root canals, the machine-assisted agitation systems (ultrasound and EndoVac) removed more debris than the manual techniques. Microsc. Res. Tech. 75:781790, 2012. (C) 2011 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Identificador

MICROSCOPY RESEARCH AND TECHNIQUE, HOBOKEN, v. 75, n. 6, supl. 2, Part 3, pp. 781-790, JUN, 2012

1059-910X

http://www.producao.usp.br/handle/BDPI/40951

10.1002/jemt.21125

http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jemt.21125

Idioma(s)

eng

Publicador

WILEY-BLACKWELL

HOBOKEN

Relação

MICROSCOPY RESEARCH AND TECHNIQUE

Direitos

closedAccess

Copyright WILEY-BLACKWELL

Palavras-Chave #ENDODONTICS #IRRIGANT AGITATION PROTOCOLS #SMEAR LAYER #SCANNING ELECTRON MICROSCOPY #PASSIVE ULTRASONIC IRRIGATION #HISTOLOGICAL-EVALUATION #HAND INSTRUMENTATION #CLEANING EFFICACY #LAYER REMOVAL #APICAL 3RD #SYSTEM #PENETRATION #DEBRIDEMENT #ABILITY #ANATOMY & MORPHOLOGY #BIOLOGY #MICROSCOPY
Tipo

article

original article

publishedVersion