Advances in Clinical and Experimental Medicine

Title abbreviation: Adv Clin Exp Med
JCR Impact Factor (IF) – 2.1
5-Year Impact Factor – 2.2
Scopus CiteScore – 3.7 (CiteScore Tracker 3.3)
Index Copernicus  – 161.11; MNiSW – 70 pts

ISSN 1899–5276 (print)
ISSN 2451-2680 (online)
Periodicity – monthly

Download original text (EN)

Advances in Clinical and Experimental Medicine

2020, vol. 29, nr 2, February, p. 209–213

doi: 10.17219/acem/112603

Publication type: original article

Language: English

License: Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported (CC BY 3.0)

Download citation:

  • BIBTEX (JabRef, Mendeley)
  • RIS (Papers, Reference Manager, RefWorks, Zotero)

The effects of alternate irrigation of root canals with chelating agents and sodium hypochlorite on the effectiveness of smear layer removal

Wojciech Wilkoński1,A,B,C,D, Lidia Jamróz-Wilkońska2,A,C,D, Szczepan Zapotoczny3,B,C, Janusz Opiła4,B,C, Jerzy Krupiński5,E,F, Jolanta Pytko-Polończyk6,A,E,F

1 Research Department of the Polish Endodontic Society, Kielce, Poland

2 Private dental office, Wadowice, Poland

3 Department of Physical Chemistry and Electrochemistry, Jagiellonian University, Kraków, Poland

4 Department of Applied Computer Science Faculty of Management, AGH University of Science and Technology, Kraków, Poland

5 Retired Professor of the Medical University of Silesia, Katowice, Poland

6 Department of Integrated Dentistry, Dental Institute, Faculty of Medicine, Jagiellonian University Medical College, Kraków, Poland

Abstract

Background. After the mechanical preparation of a root canal, the canal walls are covered with a smear layer. In order to deeply clean the dentinal tubules, removal of the smear layer is recommended. There is no consensus on the length of time of rinsing with chelating agents or irrigation with alternating chelating agents and sodium hypochlorite (NaOCl).
Objectives. The aim of the study was to evaluate the effectiveness of smear layer removal using 4 irrigation protocols.
Material and Methods. We prepared 42 straight root canals to size ISO40/04 and assigned them into 4 study groups (n = 10) and a control group (n = 2). The root canals were irrigated as follows: in the control group, 180 s with 5.25% NaOCl; in group 1, 60 s with 40% citric acid (CA) and 120 s with NaOCl; in group 2, 120 s with CA and 120 s with NaOCl; in group 3, 30 s CA, 30 s with NaOCl, 30 s CA and 120 s with NaOCl; and in group 4, 60 s with CA, 30 s with NaOCl, 60 s with CA, and 120 s with NaOCl. The roots were split longitudinally and the root canals were observed under ×200–500 magnification. The root canal walls were analyzed in areas 2 mm, 6 mm and 10 mm from the apex.
Results. In the apical and medial sections, the best effects were achieved in groups 3 and 4. In coronal sections, no significant differences between experimental groups were found.
Conclusion. Within the limitations of this study, it can be concluded that irrigation with alternating NaOCl and CA was the most effective at smear layer removal, regardless of the irrigation time.

Key words

irrigation, citric acid, sodium hypochlorite, smear layer, root canals

References (15)

  1. De-Deus G, Paciornik S, Pinho Mauricio MH, Prioli R. Real-time atomic force microscopy of root dentine during demineralization when subjected to chelating agents. Int Endod J. 2006;39(9):683–692.
  2. De-Deus G, Reis CM, Fidel RA, Fidel SR, Paciornik S. Co-site digital optical microscopy and image analysis: An approach to evaluate the process of dentine demineralization. Int Endod J. 2007;40(6):441–452.
  3. De-Deus G, Zehnder M, Reis C, et al. Longitudinal co-site optical microscopy study on the chelating ability of etidronate and EDTA using a comparative single-tooth model. J Endod. 2008;34(1):71–75.
  4. De-Deus G, Souza EM, Marins JR, Reis C, Paciornik S, Zehnder M. Smear layer dissolution by peracetic acid of low concentration. Int Endod J. 2011;44(6):485–490.
  5. Prado M, Gusman H, Gomes BP, Simão RA. Scanning electron microscopic investigation of the effectiveness of phosphoric acid in smear layer removal when compared with EDTA and citric acid. J Endod. 2011;37(2):255–258.
  6. Tay FR, Gutmann JL, Pashley DH. Microporous, demineralized collagen matrices in intact radicular dentin created by commonly used calcium-depleting endodontic irrigants. J Endod. 2007;33(9):1086–1090.
  7. Tay FR, Hosoya Y, Loushine RJ, Pashley DH, Weller RN, Low DC. Ultrastructure of intraradicular dentin after irrigation with BioPure MTAD. II. The consequence of obturation with an epoxy resin-based sealer. J Endod. 2006;32(5):473–477.
  8. Pawińska M, Szczurko G, Kierlo A, Sidun J. A laboratory study evaluating the pH of various modern root canal filling materials. Adv Clin Exp Med. 2017;26(3):387–392.
  9. Khedmat S, Shokouhinejad N. Comparison of the efficacy of three chelating agents in smear layer removal. J Endod. 2008;34(5):599–602.
  10. Bojar W, Marczewska J, Karwicka E, Anuszewska E. Cytotoxicity and mutagenicity of N2 cement: Root canal filling material. Adv Clin Exp Med. 2009;18(6):615–621.
  11. Karunakaran JV, Kumar SS, Kumar M, Chandrasekhar S, Namitha D. The effects of various irrigating solutions on intra-radicular dentinal surface: A SEM analysis. J Pharm Bioallied Sci. 2012;4(2):S125–130.
  12. Hasheminia SM, Birang R, Feizianfard M, Nasouri M. A comparative study of the removal of smear layer by two endodontic irrigants and Nd:YAG laser: A scanning electron microscopic study. ISRN Dent. 2012;2012:620951. doi:10.5402/2012/620951
  13. Cavassim R, Leite FR, Zandim DL, Dantas AA, Rached RS, Sampaio JE. Influence of concentration, time and method of application of citric acid and sodium citrate in root conditioning. J Appl Oral Sci. 2012;20(3):376–383.
  14. Andrabi SM, Kumar A, Kumar Tewari R, Kumar Mishra S, Iftekhar H. An in vitro SEM study on the effectiveness of smear layer removal of four different irrigations. Iran Endod J. 2012;7(4):171–176.
  15. Wu L, Mu Y, Deng X, Zhang S, Zhou D. Comparison of the effect of four decalcifying agents combined with 60°C 3% sodium hypochlorite on smear layer removal. J Endod. 2012;38(3):381–384.