Removal of the smear layer from flattened canals using different chemical substances.
Marcos Arruda, de Arruda, Jacy Ribeiro de Carvalho, de Souza-Filho Fj, Manoel Damião Sousa‐Neto, de Freitas
Abstract
Marcos Arruda, de Arruda, Jacy Ribeiro de Carvalho, de Souza-Filho Fj, Manoel Damião Sousa‐Neto, de Freitas
Abstract
This study used scanning electron microscopy to evaluate the flattened root canals of human mandibular incisors cleaned with nickel-titanium instruments and different chemical substances. Teeth were selected and divided randomly into five groups (n = 10) according to the chemical substances used in the biomechanical preparation: 5.25% sodium hypochlorite (Group 1), 5.25% sodium hypochlorite plus a final irrigation with 17% EDTAC (Group 2), EDTA gel combined with 5.25% sodium hypochlorite (Group 3), 2% chlorhexidine gel (Group 4), and 5.25% sodium hypochlorite combined with Glyde File Prep gel (Group 5). Data analysis showed a statistically significant difference (p < 0.001) among groups. Groups 1 and 5 were similar statistically (p > 0.001) and displayed a higher amount of smear layer on canal walls. Samples from Groups 2, 3, and 4 revealed root canal walls without smear layer and exposed dentin tubules. Among the associations tested in this study, 5.25% sodium hypochlorite solution combined with 17% EDTAC, 5.25% sodium hypochlorite combined with EDTA gel, and 2% chlorhexidine gel all were effective substances for removing the smear layer from flattened root canals.
OpenAlex reports 7 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.
A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
This study used scanning electron microscopy to evaluate the flattened root canals of human mandibular incisors cleaned with nickel-titanium instruments and different chemical substances. Teeth were selected and divided randomly into five groups (n = 10) according to the chemical substances used in the biomechanical preparation: 5.25% sodium hypochlorite (Group 1), 5.25% sodium hypochlorite plus a final irrigation with 17% EDTAC (Group 2), EDTA gel combined with 5.25% sodium hypochlorite (Group 3), 2% chlorhexidine gel (Group 4), and 5.25% sodium hypochlorite combined with Glyde File Prep gel (Group 5). Data analysis showed a statistically significant difference (p < 0.001) among groups. Groups 1 and 5 were similar statistically (p > 0.001) and displayed a higher amount of smear layer on canal walls. Samples from Groups 2, 3, and 4 revealed root canal walls without smear layer and exposed dentin tubules. Among the associations tested in this study, 5.25% sodium hypochlorite solution combined with 17% EDTAC, 5.25% sodium hypochlorite combined with EDTA gel, and 2% chlorhexidine gel all were effective substances for removing the smear layer from flattened root canals.
Key concepts: Sodium hypochlorite, Smear layer, Chlorhexidine, Dentistry, Dentin, Root canal, Chemistry, Nuclear chemistry