The results suggested that there is little difference between the two types of lasers-Er:YAG and Er,Cr:YSGG lasers-morphologically for class V cavity preparation, because both lasers were capable of preparing class V cavities, and the morphological features of the irradiated surfaces were very similar.

The results of this study suggested that Er,Cr:YSGG laser irradiation with and without water mist appears to be effective for increasing acid resistance.

These results indicate that the diode laser is useful for removing smear layer and debris from root canal walls, and reducing apical leakage after obturation in vitro, and suggest that it would be useful for root canal treatment in clinic.

It can be concluded that CO2 laser irradiation with NaF solution has more caries-preventive effect than CO2 laser irradiation only at the enamel and dentin surfaces.

Aim:The purpose of this review is to address the smear layer removing the ability of root different canal irrigants including ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA), a mixture of tetracycline, acid and detergent (MTAD), tetraclean, citric acid, Q-Mix, maleic acid, and smear clear.Background: Smear layer is a layer which is produced during instrumentation. It contains both organic and inorganic materials. It may also contain bacteria and their byproduct considering the root canal situation. This layer may prevent the penetration of the healing material introduced to the canal to the interior of the dentinal tubules. In addition, it can affect the adaptation of sealing materials to the root canal walls. Review results:The smear layer removal ability of MTAD is superior and faster than EDTA. Tetraclean is similarly composed of an acid, an antibiotic, and a detergent. The presence of doxycycline is believed to help the smear layer removal ability of these irrigants. Antibiotics such as tetracycline had similar smear layer removal ability as even citric acid. EDTA is an amino acid with a chelating ability that sequestrates metal ions. Some believed EDTA smear layer removing ability is better than MTAD, tetraclean, SmearClear, and 20% citric acid which is controversial in case of comparison between MTAD and EDTA. Phosphoric acid is efficient enough to be comparable to EDTA in removing the smear layer. Maleic acid is an organic compound with acid etching smear layer removal. Its ability seems to be similar or even better than EDTA. Citric acid as another organic acid is believed to be used as smear removing agent. HEBP is another chelating agent that can be used in combination with NaOCl; however, HEBP is a weak decalcifying agent compared to EDTA and hence cannot be applied as a mere final rinse. QMiX is a combination of CHX, EDTA, and detergent and should be used at final rinse. It is believed that QMiX is as efficient as EDTA. Smear clear is a 17% EDTA solution including an anionic and cationic (cetrimide) surfactant. The ability of QMiX is similar to EDTA. Conclusion:There are different canal irrigation solutions with various smear layer removal ability that some should be used as a mere final rinse and some should not. Clinical significance:The usage of canal irrigation solutions depends on the clinical situation and preference of the dentists. This study provides a good guide for clinician of the field.