Journal of Pharmacy And Bioallied Sciences
Journal of Pharmacy And Bioallied Sciences Login  | Users Online: 909  Print this pageEmail this pageSmall font sizeDefault font sizeIncrease font size 
    Home | About us | Editorial board | Search | Ahead of print | Current Issue | Past Issues | Instructions | Online submission


ORIGINAL RESEARCH
Year : 2019  |  Volume : 11  |  Issue : 5  |  Page : 51-58

Time-dependent effect of various irrigants for root canal on smear layer removal


1 Department of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, People’s College of Dental Sciences and Research Centre, Bhopal, India
2 Department of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, Modern Dental College and Research Centre, Indore, Madhya Pradesh, India
3 Department of Prosthodontics Crown and Bridge, Al-Badar Dental College and Hospital, Kalaburagi, Karnataka, India
4 Department of Prosthodontics Crown and Bridge, Government Dental College and Hospital, Hyderabad, Telangana, India
5 Department of Preventive Dental Sciences, College of Dentistry, Dar Al Uloom University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia

Correspondence Address:
Dr. Shikha Singh
Department of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, People’s College of Dental Sciences and Research Centre, Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh
India
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/JPBS.JPBS_195_18

Rights and Permissions

Background: Existence of smear layer in root canals caused by instrumentation is believed to prevent penetration of irrigating agents, thereby resulting in endodontic treatment. Aims and Objectives: To compare and evaluate the effectiveness of two irrigants: 17% ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA) and mixture of tetracycline isomer, an acid, and a detergent (MTAD) as final agents for eliminating the smear layer. Materials and Methods: We included 50 human lower premolar teeth whose crowns were sectioned at cementoenamel junction. The sample was randomly grouped into five groups, each with 10 teeth. Group 1: 1mL of 17% EDTA as final rinse for 1min, Group 2: 1mL of 17% EDTA for 30s, Group 3: 5mL of MTAD for 2.5min, Group 4: 5mL of MTAD for 5min, and Group 5: saline. The specimens were sectioned vertically all along the long axis and fixed on an aluminum stub for gold ion sputtering. Scanning electron microscope was used to observe the specimens, and photomicrographs were taken at coronal, middle, and apical thirds of canal, and assessed by Torabinejad scoring system by two examiners, and the observations were analyzed statistically. Results: When Group 1 and Group 2 and Groups 3 and 4 were compared, we found a significant variation in removal of smear layer at cervical and middle thirds, and insignificant difference at apical third. In comparison with EDTA and saline, MTAD was more efficient significantly in middle and cervical thirds and insignificant at apical third. Conclusion: MTAD is an efficient irrigant for removing smear layer than EDTA and saline.


[FULL TEXT] [PDF]*
Print this article     Email this article
 Next article
 Previous article
 Table of Contents

 Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
 Citation Manager
 Access Statistics
 Reader Comments
 Email Alert *
 Add to My List *
 * Requires registration (Free)
 

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed234    
    Printed9    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded11    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal