Author(s):
Madhu Varma K, Manishaa B, Kalyan Satish R, Sita Rama Kumar M, Panithini D B, Madhavi K
Email(s):
madhuvarma.k@vdc.edu.in , manishaabondada97@gmail.com , rkalyansatish@vdc.edu.in , sitaramkumar.m@vdc.edu.in , durgabhavanipanitini@gmail.com , kumpatlamadhavi@gmail.com
DOI:
10.52711/0974-360X.2023.00307 
Address:
Madhu Varma K1, Manishaa B2*, Kalyan Satish R1, Sita Rama Kumar M3, Panithini D B2, Madhavi K2
1Professor, Department of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, Vishnu Dental College and Hospital, Bhimavaram 534201, Andhra Pradesh, India.
3Senior Lecturer, Department of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, Vishnu Dental College and Hospital, Bhimavaram 534201, Andhra Pradesh, India.
2Postgraduate Student, Department of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, Vishnu Dental College and Hospital, Bhimavaram 534201, Andhra Pradesh, India.
*Corresponding Author
Published In:
Volume - 16,
Issue - 4,
Year - 2023
ABSTRACT:
Aim: To compare the effectiveness of three different irrigating solutions (NaOCl+ EDTA, REMIX 2 IN 1, TWIN KLEEN) on the removal of smear layer with the single file system (XP-Endo Shaper) in mandibular premolars using a scanning electron microscope. Materials and Methods: Thirty-three human single-rooted mandibular premolar teeth were selected and decoronated to a standardized length. Biomechanical preparation was done with a single file system (XP-Endo Shaper) using 3% NaOCl as an irrigant during instrumentation. Three experimental groups were formed by randomly dividing teeth, with eleven teeth in each Group (n=11), and final irrigation was carried out using the following solutions; Group I - (control group) 5.25% Sodium Hypochlorite (NaOCl) and 17% ethylenediaminetetraacetic (EDTA), Group II - REMIX 2 IN 1 solution (Neelkanth healthcare, India), Group III - freshly prepared TWIN KLEEN (Maarc dental, India) solution. The teeth were separated into two halves and observed under a scanning electron microscope at 3mm, 6mm, and 9mm from the apex to analyze the amount smear layer in 1000X and were evaluated using a 5-grade scoring system. Kruskal–Wallis test and Mann–Whitney U test were used to analyze the data. Results: On comparing the three different irrigating solutions, no statistically significant difference was found in the ability to remove the smear layer from the coronal and middle third's (P>0.05). Group I (1.14±0.68) and Group II (1.18±0.40) showed significantly higher removal of smear layer when compared to Group III (1.81±0.60) in the apical third. Conclusion: Sequential use of 5.25% NaOCl + 17% EDTA and REMIX 2 IN 1 solution were found to be the most efficient than TWIN KLEEN solution in removing the smear layer in the apical third of root canals instrumented with the single file system (XP-Endo Shaper).
Cite this article:
Madhu Varma K, Manishaa B, Kalyan Satish R, Sita Rama Kumar M, Panithini D B, Madhavi K. Smear Layer removal efficacy of different types of Irrigation Solutions with single file system: An in vitro SEM Study. Research Journal of Pharmacy and Technology 2023; 16(4):1875-9. doi: 10.52711/0974-360X.2023.00307
Cite(Electronic):
Madhu Varma K, Manishaa B, Kalyan Satish R, Sita Rama Kumar M, Panithini D B, Madhavi K. Smear Layer removal efficacy of different types of Irrigation Solutions with single file system: An in vitro SEM Study. Research Journal of Pharmacy and Technology 2023; 16(4):1875-9. doi: 10.52711/0974-360X.2023.00307 Available on: https://rjptonline.org/AbstractView.aspx?PID=2023-16-4-56
REFERENCES:
1. Umaiyal MP. Awareness of Root Canal Treatment among People. Research Journal of Pharmacy and Technology. 2016;9(7):779-81. doi: 10.5958/0974-360X.2016.00149.9
2. Eliot C, Hatton JF, Stewart GP, Hildebolt CF, Gillespie MJ, Gutmann JL. The effect of the irrigant QMix on removal of canal wall smear layer: an ex vivo study. Odontology. 2014;102(2):232-40. doi: 10.1007/s10266-012-0102-1
3. McComb D, Smith DC. A preliminary scanning electron microscopic study of root canals after endodontic procedures. Journal of endodontics. 1975;1(7):238-42. doi: 10.1016/S0099-2399(75)80226-3
4. Agrawal Vineet S, Rajesh M, Sonali K, Mukesh P. A contemporary overview of endodontic irrigants–A review. J Dent App. 2014;1(6):105-5. ISSN : 2381-9049
5. Lokhasudhan G, Ajitha P. Role of Antibiotics as Intracanal Medicament-A Literature Review. Research Journal of Pharmacy and Technology. 2018;11(4):1691-6. doi: 10.5958/0974-360X.2018.00315.3
6. Nandakumar M, Nasim I. Use of antibiotics in endodontics-clinical practice guidelines. Research Journal of Pharmacy and Technology. 2019;12(1):419-24. doi: 10.5958/0974-360X.2019.00076.3
7. Suhashini R, Lakshmi T. Acacia catechu a Pivotal in Root Canal Treatment-A Review. Research Journal of Pharmacy and Technology. 2013;6(10):1169-70. Available on:https://rjptonline.org/AbstractView.aspx?PID=2013-6-10-15
8. Roy A. In-vitro antibacterial activity of ethyl acetate extract of Sesbania grandiflora leaf against E. faecalis-A root canal threat. Research Journal of Pharmacy and Technology. 2016;9(12):2147-9. doi: 10.5958/0974-360X.2016.00435.2
9. Gupta R, Rai N, Shetty SS. Herbal irrigants: Underutilized option in dentistry. Research Journal of Pharmacy and Technology. 2019;12(10):5098-100. doi: 10.5958/0974-360X.2019.00883.7
10. Divya S, Sujatha S. Evaluation of Antimicrobial effect of Triphala versus conventional root canal irrigants in primary teeth-An In vivo study. Research Journal of Pharmacy and Technology. 2019;12(2):655-9. doi: 10.5958/0974-360X.2019.00116.1
11. Baskaran K, Raj JD, Yang JN. Comparative Study of Cleaning Efficacy of Different Concentrations of Sodium Hypochlorite on Nickel-Titanium Endodontic Instruments. Research Journal of Pharmacy and Technology. 2017;10(1):75-7. doi: 10.5958/0974-360X.2017.00018.X
12. Patil PH, Gulve MN, Kolhe SJ, Samuel RM, Aher GB. Efficacy of new irrigating solution on smear layer removal in apical third of root canal: A scanning electron microscope study J Conserv Dent 2018;21:190-3. doi: 10.4103/JCD.JCD_155_17
13. Amaral RR, Oliveira AG, Braga T, Reher P, de Macêdo Farias L, Magalhães PP, Ferreira PG, de Souza Côrtes MI. Quantitative Assessment of the Efficacy of Two Different Single-file Systems in Reducing the Bacterial load in Oval-Shaped Canals: A Clinical Study. Journal of Endodontics. 2020;46(9):1228-34. doi: 10.1016/j.joen.2020.06.007
14. Morales MD, Sánchez JA, Fernández JG, Laperre K, Sans FA, Jaramillo DE, Terol FD. TRUShape Versus XP-endo Shaper: A Micro–computed Tomographic Assessment and Comparative Study of the Shaping Ability—An In Vitro Study. Journal of endodontics. 2020;46(2):271-6. doi: 10.1016/j.joen.2019.10.027
15. Zehnder M, Schmidlin P, Sener B, Waltimo T. Chelation in root canal therapy reconsidered. J Endod 2005;31:817‑20. doi: 10.1097/01.don.0000158233.59316.fe
16. Rajarajan G, Priyadorshini SP, Subbarao C. Effect of Different Irrigating Solutions in the Removal of Smear Layer from the Root Canal. Research Journal of Pharmacy and Technology. 2019;12(3):1115-8. doi:10.5958/0974-360X.2019.00183.5
17. Sheik R, Nasim I. Newer root canal irrigants-A review. Research Journal of Pharmacy and Technology. 2016;9(12):1451-6. doi: 10.5958/0974-360X.2016.00473.X
18. Ballal NV, Gandhi P, Shenoy PA, Shenoy Belle V, Bhat V, Rechenberg DK, Zehnder M. Safety assessment of an etidronate in a sodium hypochlorite solution: randomized double‐blind trial. International endodontic journal. 2019;52(9):1274-82. doi: 10.1111/iej.13129
19. Shaheen NA. The efficacy of different single file systems in cleaning oval shaped root canal. Tanta Dental Journal. 2019;16(2):73. doi: 10.4103/tdj.tdj_46_18
20. Ahir B, Parekh V, Katyayan MK, Katyayan PA. Smear layer removal efficacy of different irrigating solutions: A comparative scanning electron microscope evaluation. Indian Journal of Dental Research. 2014;25(5):617. doi: 10.4103/0970-9290.147107
21. Hülsmann M, Rümmelin C, Schäfers F. Root canal cleanliness after preparation with different endodontic handpieces and hand instruments: a comparative SEM investigation. Journal of Endodontics. 1997;23(5):301-6. doi: 10.1016/S0099-2399(97)80410-4
22. Li KZ, Gao Y, Zhang R, Hu T, Guo B. The effect of a manual instrumentation technique on five types of premolar root canal geometry assessed by microcomputed tomography and three-dimensional reconstruction. BMC Medical Imaging. 2011;11(1):1-9. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2342-11-14
23. Markvart M, Darvann TA, Larsen P, Dalstra M, Kreiborg S, Bjørndal L. Micro‐CT analyses of apical enlargement and molar root canal complexity. International endodontic journal. 2012;45(3):273-81. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2591.2011.01972.x
24. Zhao D, Shen Y, Peng B, Haapasalo M. Root canal preparation of mandibular molars with 3 nickel-titanium rotary instruments: a micro–computed tomographic study. Journal of endodontics. 2014;40(11):1860-4. doi: 10.1016/j.joen.2014.06.023
25. Azim AA, Piasecki L, da Silva Neto UX, Cruz AT, Azim KA. XP Shaper, a novel adaptive core rotary instrument: micro–computed tomographic analysis of its shaping abilities. Journal of endodontics. 2017;43(9):1532-8. doi: 10.1016/j.joen.2017.04.022
26. Bertrand MF, Pizzardini P, Muller M, Medioni E, Rocca JP. The removal of the smear layer using the Quantec system. A study using the scanning electron microscope. International Endodontic Journal. 1999;32(3):217-24. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2591.1999.00231.x
27. Ballal NV, Tweeny A, Khechen K, Prabhu KN, Tay FR. Wettability of root canal sealers on intraradicular dentine treated with different irrigating solutions. Journal of dentistry. 2013;41(6):556-60. doi: 10.1016/j.jdent.2013.04.005
28. Paqué F, Rechenberg DK, Zehnder M. Reduction of hard-tissue debris accumulation during rotary root canal instrumentation by etidronic acid in a sodium hypochlorite irrigant. Journal of endodontics. 2012;38(5):692-5. doi: 10.1016/j.joen.2011.12.019