Effect of temperature and passive ultrasonic irrigation of EDTA 17% in smear layer removal

Fitra Nabiila Alfiona; RR Mahayu Dewi Ariani; Nadia Hardini; Gloria Fortuna

doi:10.22146/majkedgiind.64026

Effect of temperature and passive ultrasonic irrigation of EDTA 17% in smear layer removal

https://doi.org/10.22146/majkedgiind.64026

Fitra Nabiila Alfiona⁽¹⁾, RR Mahayu Dewi Ariani⁽²⁾, Nadia Hardini⁽³⁾, Gloria Fortuna^(4*)

(1) Department of Dentistry, Faculty of Medicine, Diponegoro University, Semarang, Central Java
(2) Department of Medical Biology and Biochemistry, Faculty of Medicine, Diponegoro University, Semarang, Central Java
(3) Department of Dentistry, Faculty of Medicine, Diponegoro University, Semarang, Central Java
(4) Department of Dentistry, Faculty of Medicine, Diponegoro University, Semarang, Central Java
(*) Corresponding Author

Abstract

Smear layer removal in root canal treatment is required to aid the diffusion of intracanal medicament and help sealer penetrate into dentinal tubules. The need for irrigants is important to facilitate smear layer removal in the root canal. Various methods have been proposed in some articles, but their application in apical third still challenges many clinicians due to the complexity of the root canal. This study aimed to analyze the effect of temperature and passive ultrasonic irrigation (PUI) activation of EDTA 17% solution in smear layer removal. Twenty-four extracted mandibular premolars were decoronated to standard root length of 14 mm. The preparation of root canals was completed with crown-down technique using ProTaper FHU to file F3 (30/.09). The root canal irrigation was done with NaOCl 5.25% and EDTA 17% solution. The samples were divided into four groups, namely 25 ºC of EDTA 17% solution (group 1), 37 ºC of EDTA 17% solution (group 2), 25 ºC of EDTA 17% solution with PUI activation (group 3), and 37 ºC of EDTA
17% solution with PUI activation (group 4). Smear layer removal was observed under scanning electron microscopy (SEM) and scored ordinally from 1-5. Non-parametric Friedman test showed significant results in all the groups (p<0.05). Post hoc Wilcoxon Signed Rank test showed significant results between group 2 and group 3 (p = 0.039), and between group 3 and group 4 (p = 0.038). The combination methods of temperature and PUI activation showed a significant result in smear layer removal.

Keywords

EDTA 17%; PUI activation; root canal irrigation; smear layer; temperature

Full Text:

PDF

References

1. Al-Hashimi RA, Al-Huwaizi HF. Standardized Protocol for Endodontic Treatment (Iraqi
Endodontic Society). Iraqi Dent J. 2015; 37(2): 69. doi: 10.26477/idj.v37i2.46

2. Dewiyani S. Perawatan endodontik pada kasus periodontitis apikalis kronis. J PDGI. 2014; 63(3): 99-103.

3. American Association of Endodontist. Glossary of Endodontic Terms, Ninth Edition. 2016; 9: 1-50.

4. Ruddle CJ. F or S Uccess. Endod Top. 2006; (April): 1-7.

5. Kutty SKN, Lekshmi MS, E AM. Pulp tissue dissolution in endodontics- A review. Int J
Appl Dent Sci. 2017; 3(2): 193-196.

6. Walsh LJ, George R. Activation of alkaline irrigation fluids in endodontics. Materials
(Basel). 2017; 10(10): 1-10. doi: 10.3390/ma10101214

7. Parmar G, Chhatariya A. Demineralising effect of EDTA at different concentration and pH–a
spectrophotometer study. Endodontology. 2004; 16(1): 54-57.

8. Bellinda M, Ratih DN, Hadriyanto W. Perbedaan konsentrasi dan waktu aplikasi
edta sebagai bahan irigasi saluran akar terhadap kekuatan pelekatan push-out bahan pengisi saluran akar. J Ked Gi. 2016; 7(2): 118-124.

9. Poggio C, Ceci M, Beltrami R, Colombo M, Dagna A. Viscosity of endodontic irrigants: Influence of temperature. Dent Res J (Isfahan). 2015; 12(5): 425-430. doi: 10.4103/1735-3327.166189

10. Çiçek E, Keskin Ö. The effect of the temperature changes of EDTA and MTAD on the removal of the smear layer: A scanning electron microscopy study. Scanning. 2015; 37(3): 193-196. doi: 10.1002/sca.21198

11. Schmidt TF, Teixeira CS, Felippe MCS, Felippe WT, Pashley DH, Bortoluzzi EA. Effect of Ultrasonic Activation of Irrigants on Smear Layer Removal. J Endod. 2015; 41(8): 1359-1363. doi: 10.1016/j.joen.2015.03.023

12. Herrera DR, Martinho FC, de-Jesus-Soares A, et al. Clinical efficacy of EDTA ultrasonic
activation in the reduction of endotoxins and cultivable bacteria. Int Endod J. 2017; 50(10):
933-940. doi: 10.1111/iej.12713

13. ROY RA, AHMAD M, CRUM LA. Physical mechanisms governing the hydrodynamic
response of an oscillating ultrasonic file. Int Endod J. 1994; 27(4): 197-207. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2591.1994.tb00254.x

14. Kato AS, Cunha RS, Da Silveira Bueno CE, Pelegrine RA, Fontana CE, De Martin
AS. Investigation of the efficacy of passive ultrasonic irrigation versus irrigation with
reciprocating activation: An environmental scanning electron microscopic study. J
Endod. 2016; 42(4): 659-663. doi: 10.1016/j.joen.2016.01.016

15. Ingle, John; Bakland, Leif; Baumgartner JC. This ebook is uploaded by dentalebooks.com.
Published online 2008:206.

16. Mozo S, Llena C, Chieffi N, Forner L, Ferrari M. Effectiveness of passive ultrasonic irrigation
in improving elimination of smear layer and opening dentinal tubules. J Clin Exp Dent. 2014; 6(1). doi: 10.4317/jced.51297

17. Souza MA, Motter FT, Fontana TP, Ribeiro MB, Miyagaki DC, Cecchin D. Influence of ultrasonic activation in association with different final irrigants on intracanal smear layer removal. Brazilian J Oral Sci. 2016; 15(1): 16-20. doi: 10.20396/bjos.v15i1.8647092

18. Peters OA, Barbakow F. Effects of irrigation on debris and smear layer on canal walls prepared by two rotary techniques: A scanning electron microscopic study. J Endod. 2000; 26(1): 6-10. doi: 10.1097/00004770-200001000-00002

19. Alamoudi RA. The smear layer in endodontic: To keep or remove-an updated overview.
Saudi Endod J. 2019;9(2):71-81. doi:10.4103/sej.sej_95_18

20. Nischith KG, Srikumar GPV, Razvi S, Chandra RV. Effect of smear layer on the apical seal of
endodontically treated teeth: An ex vivo study. J Contemp Dent Pract. 2012;13(1):23-26.
doi:10.5005/jp-journals-10024-1090

21. Ahmad M, Pitt Ford TR, Crum LA, Walton AJ. Ultrasonic debridement of root canals: Acoustic cavitation and its relevance. Int Endod J. 2009; 42(5): 391-398.
doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2591.2009.01560.x

22. Ylmaz Z, Aktemur S, Buzoglu HD, Gümüsderelioglu M. The effect of temperature
and pH variations on the surface tension of EDTA solutions. J Endod. 2011; 37(6): 825-827. doi: 10.1016/j.joen.2011.03.012

23. Paragliola R, Franco V, Fabiani C, et al. Final Rinse Optimization: Influence of Different
Agitation Protocols. J Endod. 2010; 36(2): 282-285. doi: 10.1016/j.joen.2009.10.004

24. Amin K, Masoodi A, Nabi S, et al. Effect of diode laser and ultrasonics with and without
ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid on smear layer removal. J Conserv Dent. 2016; 19(5):
424-427. doi: 10.4103/0972-0707.190005

DOI: https://doi.org/10.22146/majkedgiind.64026