Journal of Endodontics · 2002 · 60 citations · 19 references
DentistryEndodonticsCavity PreparationRoot Canal TherapyApical PreparationCanal CleaningIrrigation ProtocolsRoot Canal ObturationRoot PlaningRoot-end Filling MaterialsCanal Disinfection MaterialsIrrigant Penetration Into Root Canal IrregularitiesRoot Canal Cleaning EfficacyRoot Canal CleanlinessRoot Canal Treatment EvaluationRoot-end Cavity Decontamination
The purpose of this study using a scanning electron microscope was to investigate the efficacy of four different irrigation techniques after canal preparation with Profile Ni-Ti rotary instruments. A modified technique for the use of Glyde File Prep is proposed. Forty anterior teeth were divided into four groups, instrumented, and irrigated as follows: physiological solution (group A), 2.5% sodium hypochlorite (group B), 2.5% sodium hypochlorite and Glyde File Prep (group C), and 2.5% sodium hypochlorite and Glyde File Prep applied at the end of the preparation with sterile paper points (group D). After scanning electron microscopic evaluation at three different levels, debris, smear layer, and dentinal tubules were scored. Groups A and B had significantly more smear layer and less open tubules on the canal walls compared with the group C and group D samples. Differences in the mean amount of debris between group A samples and other irrigation regimes were statistically significant. The purpose of this study using a scanning electron microscope was to investigate the efficacy of four different irrigation techniques after canal preparation with Profile Ni-Ti rotary instruments. A modified technique for the use of Glyde File Prep is proposed. Forty anterior teeth were divided into four groups, instrumented, and irrigated as follows: physiological solution (group A), 2.5% sodium hypochlorite (group B), 2.5% sodium hypochlorite and Glyde File Prep (group C), and 2.5% sodium hypochlorite and Glyde File Prep applied at the end of the preparation with sterile paper points (group D). After scanning electron microscopic evaluation at three different levels, debris, smear layer, and dentinal tubules were scored. Groups A and B had significantly more smear layer and less open tubules on the canal walls compared with the group C and group D samples. Differences in the mean amount of debris between group A samples and other irrigation regimes were statistically significant.
19