A comparative evaluation of smear layer removal by using ethylenediamine tetraacetic acid, citric acid, and maleic acid as root canal irrigants: An
Citric acid
ethylenediamine tetraacetic acid
maleic acid
scanning electron microscope
smear layer
Journal
Journal of conservative dentistry : JCD
ISSN: 0972-0707
Titre abrégé: J Conserv Dent
Pays: India
ID NLM: 101147009
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Historique:
received:
01
02
2020
revised:
27
06
2020
accepted:
27
07
2020
entrez:
23
11
2020
pubmed:
24
11
2020
medline:
24
11
2020
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Irrigants remove or dissolve smear layer formed during instrumentation. Thus it is important to study the effect of different irrigant solutions on smear layer removal. The aim of this study is to determine which irrigant effectively removes the smear layer from the coronal, middle, and apical third of the root canal. One hundred and twenty single-rooted mandibular premolars were decoronated and biomechanical preparation was done through hand instrumentation up to size 40 k file with 2.5% NaOCl irrigation between each successive filing, followed by irrigation with 5 ml of saline. The teeth were divided into Groups I, II, III, and IV containing 30 samples each and irrigated with 5 ml of 17% ethylenediamine tetraacetic acid (EDTA), 10% Citric acid, 7% Maleic acid and normal saline respectively for 1 min and final irrigation was done with 5 ml of distilled water of each sample. The canals were dried with 2% absorbent paper points. The roots were then split with a chisel and mallet. One-half of each tooth was selected and then was analyzed using a scanning electron microscope. The dentinal surfaces were observed at the cervical, middle, and apical third with ×2000 for the smear layer. The scores were attributed, according to Torabinejad 7% maleic acid and 10% citric acid both are equally effective in smear layer removal from coronal and middle third, but in apical third 7% maleic acid is more effective than 10% citric acid. Between citric acid and EDTA, both are equally effective in smear layer removal from coronal and middle third, but in apical third, 10% citric acid is more efficacious than 17% EDTA. Within the limitations of the study, it can be concluded that all three tested irrigants removed the smear layer from coronal, middle, and apical third. However, in apical third 7% maleic acid is the most efficacious irrigant in smear layer removal.
Identifiants
pubmed: 33223646
doi: 10.4103/JCD.JCD_43_20
pii: JCD-23-71
pmc: PMC7657419
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
71-78Informations de copyright
Copyright: © 2020 Journal of Conservative Dentistry.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
There are no conflicts of interest.
Références
ISRN Dent. 2012;2012:620951
pubmed: 22844605
Arch Oral Biol. 1976;21(10):599-603
pubmed: 1068651
Dent Clin North Am. 2010 Apr;54(2):291-312
pubmed: 20433979
J Conserv Dent. 2018 Jul-Aug;21(4):419-423
pubmed: 30122824
Braz Dent J. 2012;23(4):351-6
pubmed: 23207848
J Endod. 2009 Nov;35(11):1573-6
pubmed: 19840650
J Int Soc Prev Community Dent. 2016 Aug;6(Suppl 2):S160-5
pubmed: 27652250
J Conserv Dent. 2017 Jul-Aug;20(4):245-250
pubmed: 29259361
J Conserv Dent. 2015 May-Jun;18(3):247-51
pubmed: 26069414
J Endod. 2003 Mar;29(3):170-5
pubmed: 12669874
Indian J Dent Res. 2014 Sep-Oct;25(5):617-22
pubmed: 25511062
J Endod. 2005 Dec;31(12):867-72
pubmed: 16306820
J Endod. 1975 Jul;1(7):238-42
pubmed: 1061799
Int Endod J. 2006 Jan;39(1):18-25
pubmed: 16409324
Contemp Clin Dent. 2017 Oct-Dec;8(4):621-626
pubmed: 29326515
Int Endod J. 1999 May;32(3):217-24
pubmed: 10530210
Int Endod J. 1991 Nov;24(6):308-16
pubmed: 1820364
Pesqui Odontol Bras. 2003 Oct-Dec;17(4):349-55
pubmed: 15107918
Int Endod J. 2010 Jan;43(1):2-15
pubmed: 20002799
J Conserv Dent. 2019 Mar-Apr;22(2):149-154
pubmed: 31142984
J Int Soc Prev Community Dent. 2018 Jan-Feb;8(1):62-69
pubmed: 29629331
Int Endod J. 2000 Jan;33(1):46-52
pubmed: 11307473
J Appl Oral Sci. 2005 Mar;13(1):78-82
pubmed: 20944886
J Endod. 2002 Jun;28(6):433-7
pubmed: 12067123