A comparison of five irrigating solutions: A scanning electron microscopic study

Berg, Mark S.; Jacobsen, Egill L.; BeGole, Ellen A.; Remeikis, Nijole A.

doi:10.1016/s0099-2399(86)80153-4

Cited by 44 publications

(31 citation statements)

References 20 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In ultrasonic instrumentation irrigated with EDTA, the smear layer of the root canal wall was partially removed on cervical and middle thirds, and smear layer was visibly packed in dentine tubules. These results demonstrate the effectiveness of EDTA and its demineralization potential [7,15,35,53].…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 55%

“…Berg et al [35], Goldman et al [3,7], and Baumgartner and Mader [44] obtained similar results when they compared the manual method with ultrasonic technique and irrigation with 5.25% NaOCl. Ahmad et al [29], with ultrasonic instrumentation and irrigation with 5.25% NaOCl managed to remove the smear layer from the surface of the root canal wall.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 79%

“…This occurrence is a direct effect of the action between root canal instruments and the dentinal walls [2,9,34]. With ultrasonic instrumentation the smear layer has a different appearance and it covers the whole treated wall [24,28,29,35]. The goal of irrigation is to remove pulp tissue and/or microorganism from the root canal system including the smear layer and dentine debris that are created when instrumenting root canals [36].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

The cleaning efficiency of the root canal after different instrumentation technique and irrigation protocol: A SEM analysis

Koçani¹

2012

OJST

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aim: The objective of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of manual and ultrasonic instrumentation with varying irrigation protocols on removal of the smear layer from root canal walls. Methods: Forty extracted single rooted human teeth stored in 0.5% saline were used. Periodontal soft tissues were removed followed by crown separation at the CEJ. All the teeth were randomly divided into two groups. Manually Instrumented Group 1 was irrigated with 5.25% NaOCl and 17% EDTA alternately, same as Ultrasonically Instrumented Group 2. The controls for both groups were irrigated with saline solution. Results: Ultrasonic instrumentation and the combined use of two different solutions (5.25% NaOCl and 17% EDTA) yielded better results on smear removal. Conclusions: Irrigation with 17% EDTA followed by 5.25% NaOCl was successful in complete removal of smear layer on cervical and middle thirds of the root canals. Ultrasonic instrumentation was slightly more successful on the apical one third of the root canals.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 55%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 79%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The cleaning efficiency of the root canal after different instrumentation technique and irrigation protocol: A SEM analysis

Koçani¹

2012

OJST

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…[16] Berg et al . [24] obtained similar results when they compared the manual method with ultrasonic technique and irrigation with 5.25% NaOCl. Ahmad et al .…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 81%

Manual sonic-air and ultrasonic instrumentation of root canal and irrigation with 5.25% sodium hypochlorite and 17% Ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid: A scanning electron microscope study

2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives:The objective of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of manual, sonic-air and ultrasonic instrumentation with varying irrigation protocols on removal of the smear layer from root canal walls.Study Design:Sixty extracted single rooted human teeth stored in 0.5% saline were used. Periodontal soft tissues were removed followed by crown separation at the cementoenamel junction (CEJ). All the teeth were randomly divided into three groups. Group I was manually instrumented and irrigated with 5.25% sodium hypochlorite (NaOCl) alone and 17% Ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA) alternately, same as sonically instrumented Group II and ultrasonically instrumented Group III. The controls for all groups were irrigated with saline solution.Results:Ultrasonic over the sonic-air and manual technique, and the use of a combination of two different solutions (17% EDTA and 5.25% NaOCl) alternatively yielded better outcome.Conclusions:Ultrasonic, sonic-air and manual instrumentation of the root canal and irrigation with combined solutions is effective in removal of the smear layer from the instrumented walls of the root canal.

show abstract

“…[3] The alternating use of NaOCl and Ethylenediamine tetra-acetic acid (EDTA) has been investigated for its ability to achieve removal of organic and inorganic components of smear layer. [1456] Various smear layer removal agents such as citric acid, phosphoric acid with pH being as low as 1.5 have been investigated, the extremely low pH of these agents might have adverse effects on the periapical tissues. [7] Chlorine dioxide has recently come under consideration as a possible root canal irrigant and is reported to be tuberculocidal, bactericidal, virucidal, and fungicidal,[89] it also exhibits antimicrobial activity over a wide range of pH ranging from 3 to 9 and is less cytotoxic[10] with a better disinfectant action as compared to Sodium hypochlorite.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparative evaluation of 15% ethylenediamine tetra-acetic acid plus cetavlon and 5% chlorine dioxide in removal of smear layer: A scanning electron microscope study

et al. 2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aims:The purpose of this study was to compare the efficacy of smear layer removal by 5% chlorine dioxide and 15% Ethylenediamine Tetra-Acetic Acid plus Cetavlon (EDTAC) from the human root canal dentin.Materials and MethodsFifty single rooted human mandibular anterior teeth were divided into two groups of 20 teeth each and control group of 10 teeth. The root canals were prepared till F3 protaper and initially irrigated with 2% Sodium hypochlorite followed by 1 min irrigation with 15% EDTAC or 5% Chlorine dioxide respectively. The control group was irrigated with saline. The teeth were longitudinally split and observed under Scanning electron microscope SEM (×2000).Statistical Analysis Used:The statistical analysis was done using General Linear Mixed Model.Results:At the coronal thirds, no statistically significant difference was found between 15% EDTAC and 5% Chlorine dioxide in removing smear layer. In the middle and apical third region 15% EDTAC showed better smear layer removal ability than 5% Chlorine dioxide.Conclusion:Final irrigation with 15% EDTAC is superior to 5% chlorine dioxide in removing smear layer in the middle and apical third of radicular dentin.

show abstract

A comparison of five irrigating solutions: A scanning electron microscopic study

Cited by 44 publications

References 20 publications

The cleaning efficiency of the root canal after different instrumentation technique and irrigation protocol: A SEM analysis

The cleaning efficiency of the root canal after different instrumentation technique and irrigation protocol: A SEM analysis

Manual sonic-air and ultrasonic instrumentation of root canal and irrigation with 5.25% sodium hypochlorite and 17% Ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid: A scanning electron microscope study

Comparative evaluation of 15% ethylenediamine tetra-acetic acid plus cetavlon and 5% chlorine dioxide in removal of smear layer: A scanning electron microscope study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About