RSS-Feed abonnieren

DOI: 10.1055/s-0044-1791682
Effect of Apical Preparation Size and Preparation Taper on Smear Layer Removal Using Two Different Irrigation Needles: A Scanning Electron Microscopy Study

Abstract
Objectives The aim of this study was to determine the effect of apical preparation size and preparation taper on smear layer removal using a metallic needle and a new polymer needle (IrriFlex, Produits Dentaires SA “PD,” Vevey, Switzerland).
Materials and Methods One hundred and eight single-rooted teeth with one canal were randomly divided into four groups according to the preparation and irrigation needle used: G1—30, 0.04 and IrriFlex (n = 25); G2—25, 0.06 and IrriFlex (n = 25); G3–30, 0.04 and metallic needle (n = 25); and G4—25, 0.06 and metallic needle (n = 25). All groups received the same final irrigation protocol and sonic activation. Each tooth was sectioned and observed under a scanning electron microscope (SEM).
Statistical Analysis Data were statistically analyzed by using one-way and two-way analysis of variance on ranks with a significance level at p = 0.05.
Results For all groups, there was significantly higher smear layer in the apical third (p < 0.001) compared with the coronal and middle thirds. The 25, 0.06 preparation demonstrated better cleaning efficiency than the 30, 0.04 preparation throughout the canal when irrigated with a metallic needle; however, there were no significant differences in the middle and apical thirds when IrriFlex was used. There were also no differences of smear layer removal between G1 and G3 and G2 and G4 in the coronal part. In the middle and apical parts, G1 showed better elimination of smear layer compared with G3. There were slight differences in the middle third between G2 and G4, while G2 showed less cleaning efficiency compared with G4 in the apical third (p = 0.022).
Conclusion All groups showed less smear layer in the middle and coronal thirds of the canal compared with the apical third. The 25, 0.06 preparation was more effective in removing smear layer compared with the 30, 0.04 preparation. IrriFlex improved irrigation in the 30, 0.04 preparation, while its efficacy was less evident in the 25, 0.06 preparation.
Keywords
minimal preparation - conservative - sonic activation - polymer needle - metallic needle - smear layer removalPublikationsverlauf
Artikel online veröffentlicht:
30. Dezember 2024
© 2024. The Author(s). This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, permitting unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction so long as the original work is properly cited. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/)
Thieme Medical and Scientific Publishers Pvt. Ltd.
A-12, 2nd Floor, Sector 2, Noida-201301 UP, India
-
References
- 1 Schilder H. Cleaning and shaping the root canal. Dent Clin North Am 1974; 18 (02) 269-296
- 2 Burleson A, Nusstein J, Reader A, Beck M. The in vivo evaluation of hand/rotary/ultrasound instrumentation in necrotic, human mandibular molars. J Endod 2007; 33 (07) 782-787
- 3 Mader CL, Baumgartner JC, Peters DD. Scanning electron microscopic investigation of the smeared layer on root canal walls. J Endod 1984; 10 (10) 477-483
- 4 Violich DR, Chandler NP. The smear layer in endodontics: a review. Int Endod J 2010; 43 (01) 2-15
- 5 Kharouf N, Pedullà E, La Rosa GRM. et al. In vitro evaluation of different irrigation protocols on intracanal smear layer removal in teeth with or without pre-endodontic proximal wall restoration. J Clin Med 2020; 9 (10) 3325
- 6 Siqueira Jr JF, Pérez AR, Marceliano-Alves MF. et al. What happens to unprepared root canal walls: a correlative analysis using micro-computed tomography and histology/scanning electron microscopy. Int Endod J 2018; 51 (05) 501-508
- 7 Haapasalo M, Shen Y, Wang Z, Gao Y. Irrigation in endodontics. Br Dent J 2014; 216 (06) 299-303
- 8 de Gregorio C, Arias A, Navarrete N, Del Rio V, Oltra E, Cohenca N. Effect of apical size and taper on volume of irrigant delivered at working length with apical negative pressure at different root curvatures. J Endod 2013; 39 (01) 119-124
- 9 Haapasalo M, Shen Y, Qian W, Gao Y. Irrigation in endodontics. Dent Clin North Am 2010; 54 (02) 291-312
- 10 Caron G, Nham K, Bronnec F, Machtou P. Effectiveness of different final irrigant activation protocols on smear layer removal in curved canals. J Endod 2010; 36 (08) 1361-1366
- 11 Shemesh H. New Insights into the Root Canal Wall [thesis]. Amsterdam, the Netherlands: Universiteit van Amsterdam; 2009
- 12 Paraskevopoulou MT, Khabbaz MG. Influence of taper of root canal shape on the intracanal bacterial reduction. Open Dent J 2016; 10: 568-574
- 13 Brunson M, Heilborn C, Johnson DJ, Cohenca N. Effect of apical preparation size and preparation taper on irrigant volume delivered by using negative pressure irrigation system. J Endod 2010; 36 (04) 721-724
- 14 Boutsioukis C, Gogos C, Verhaagen B, Versluis M, Kastrinakis E, Van der Sluis LW. The effect of root canal taper on the irrigant flow: evaluation using an unsteady computational fluid dynamics model. Int Endod J 2010; 43 (10) 909-916
- 15 Silva EJNL, Pinto KP, Ferreira CM. et al. Current status on minimal access cavity preparations: a critical analysis and a proposal for a universal nomenclature. Int Endod J 2020; 53 (12) 1618-1635
- 16 Plotino G, Özyürek T, Grande NM, Gündoğar M. Influence of size and taper of basic root canal preparation on root canal cleanliness: a scanning electron microscopy study. Int Endod J 2019; 52 (03) 343-351
- 17 White JM, Eakle WS. Rationale and treatment approach in minimally invasive dentistry. J Am Dent Assoc 2000; 131: 13S-19S
- 18 Peters OA. Current challenges and concepts in the preparation of root canal systems: a review. J Endod 2004; 30 (08) 559-567
- 19 Provoost C, Rocca GT, Thibault A, Machtou P, Bouilllaguet S. Influence of needle design and irrigant flow rate on the removal of Enterococcus faecalis biofilms in vitro . Dent J 2022; 10 (04) 59
- 20 Falakaloğlu S, Yeniçeri Özata M, Güneş B, Silva EJNL, Gündoğar M, Güçyetmez Topal B. Influence of access cavity design on calcium hydroxide removal using different cleaning protocols: a confocal laser scanning microscopy study. Restor Dent Endod 2023; 48 (03) e25
- 21 Hussein ERS, SShukri BM, Ibrahim RH. The effect of chitosan nanoparticle, citric acid, and ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid on dentin smear layer using two different irrigation needles: a scanning electron microscope study. J Conserv Dent 2022; 25 (04) 431-435
- 22 Neelakantan P, Vishwanath V, Taschieri S, Corbella S. Present status and future directions: minimally invasive root canal preparation and periradicular surgery. Int Endod J 2022; 55 (Suppl. 04) 845-871
- 23 Schneider SW. A comparison of canal preparations in straight and curved root canals. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol 1971; 32 (02) 271-275
- 24 Kaloustian MK, Nehme W, El Hachem C. et al. Evaluation of two shaping systems and two sonic irrigation devices in removing root canal filling material from distal roots of mandibular molars assessed by micro CT. Int Endod J 2019; 52 (11) 1635-1644
- 25 Kaloustian MK, Hachem CE, Zogheib C. et al. Effectiveness of the revision system and sonic irrigation in the removal of root canal filling material from oval canals: an in vitro study. Bioengineering (Basel) 2022; 9 (06) 260
- 26 Gutmann JL, Saunders WP, Nguyen L, Guo IY, Saunders EM. Ultrasonic root-end preparation. Part 1. SEM analysis. Int Endod J 1994; 27 (06) 318-324
- 27 Urban K, Donnermeyer D, Schäfer E, Bürklein S. Canal cleanliness using different irrigation activation systems: a SEM evaluation. Clin Oral Investig 2017; 21 (09) 2681-2687
- 28 Arvaniti IS, Khabbaz MG. Influence of root canal taper on its cleanliness: a scanning electron microscopic study. J Endod 2011; 37 (06) 871-874
- 29 van der Sluis LW, Wu MK, Wesselink PR. The efficacy of ultrasonic irrigation to remove artificially placed dentine debris from human root canals prepared using instruments of varying taper. Int Endod J 2005; 38 (10) 764-768
- 30 de Gregorio C, Estevez R, Cisneros R, Paranjpe A, Cohenca N. Efficacy of different irrigation and activation systems on the penetration of sodium hypochlorite into simulated lateral canals and up to working length: an in vitro study. J Endod 2010; 36 (07) 1216-1221
- 31 Macedo R, Verhaagen B, Rivas DF, Versluis M, Wesselink P, van der Sluis L. Cavitation measurement during sonic and ultrasonic activated irrigation. J Endod 2014; 40 (04) 580-583
- 32 Li Q, Zhang Q, Zou X, Yue L. Evaluation of four final irrigation protocols for cleaning root canal walls. Int J Oral Sci 2020; 12 (01) 29
- 33 Albrecht LJ, Baumgartner JC, Marshall JG. Evaluation of apical debris removal using various sizes and tapers of ProFile GT files. J Endod 2004; 30 (06) 425-428
- 34 Zarei M, Javidi M, Afkhami F, Tanbakuchi B, Zadeh MM, Mohammadi MM. Influence of root canal tapering on smear layer removal. N Y State Dent J 2016; 82 (03) 35-38
- 35 Plotino G, Grande NM, Tocci L, Testarelli L, Gambarini G. Influence of different apical preparations on root canal cleanliness in human molars: a SEM study. J Oral Maxillofac Res 2014; 5 (02) e4
- 36 Xu K, Wang J, Wang K, Gen N, Li J. Micro-computed tomographic evaluation of the effect of the final apical size prepared by rotary nickel-titanium files on the removal efficacy of hard-tissue debris. J Int Med Res 2018; 46 (06) 2219-2229
- 37 Raducka M, Piszko A, Piszko PJ. et al. Narrative review on methods of activating irrigation liquids for root canal treatment. Appl Sci 2023; 13 (13) 7733
- 38 Mancini M, Armellin E, Casaglia A, Cerroni L, Cianconi L. A comparative study of smear layer removal and erosion in apical intraradicular dentine with three irrigating solutions: a scanning electron microscopy evaluation. J Endod 2009; 35 (06) 900-903
- 39 Mancini M, Cerroni L, Iorio L, Armellin E, Conte G, Cianconi L. Smear layer removal and canal cleanliness using different irrigation systems (EndoActivator, EndoVac, and passive ultrasonic irrigation): field emission scanning electron microscopic evaluation in an in vitro study. J Endod 2013; 39 (11) 1456-1460