Efficacy of smear layer removal at apical third of root canal by different irrigation regimens using XP-endo Shaper: an in vitro SEM study


Article Sidebar

PDF 30 XML 1
Published: Oct 3, 2024
DOI: https://doi.org/10.37983/IJDM.2024.6301
Keywords:
EDTA, Scanning electron microscope, Smear layer, Sodium hypochlorite (NaOCl), Super-oxidised water, XP-endo Shaper
Section
Original Articles
Statistic

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Metrics

Metrics Loading ...

Main Article Content

K Madhu Varma
Vishnu Dental College
Jagapathi Babu Mavidi
Vishnu Dental College
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2155-5086
R Kalyan Satish
Vishnu Dental College
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4720-9325
Sai Lakshmi Indukuri
Vishnu Dental College
Bondada Manishaa
Vishnu Dental College
Praveen Gadde
ESIC Dental College and Hospital
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5208-1522

Abstract

Background: Effective root canal therapy relies heavily on irrigation, as it is the sole method capable of reaching the internal anatomy of the root canal that remains inaccessible with mechanical instrumentation.
Aim: To compare the efficacy of different irrigation regimes on smear layer removal with XP-endo Shaper at the apical third of the root canal in lower premolars under a scanning electron microscope.
Materials and methods: Forty-four human single-rooted lower premolars were collected and decoronated to a standard length. Teeth were categorized into four groups based on the irrigation regimes: distilled water (DW Group), 5.25% NaOCl and 17% EDTA (SE Group), super-oxidised water and 17% EDTA (SPO Group), TWIN KLEEN solution (TK Group). Scanning electron microscopic evaluation was done at 3 mm from the apex to analyse the remaining amount of smear layer. Kruskal-Wallis test and Mann–Whitney U test were employed in this study.
Results: On comparing the ability of four different irrigation regimes to remove the smear layer, the SPO and SE Groups showed significantly higher smear layer removal (p<0.05) in the apical third of the root canal system than the TK and DW Groups.
Conclusion: In conclusion, the use of sodium hypochlorite or super-oxidised water throughout and post-instrumentation followed by chelator (EDTA) was found to be more efficient compared to a combination of NaOCl and HEBP solution in smear layer removal in the apical third instrumented with XP-endo Shaper.

Article Details


How to Cite
Varma, K. M., Mavidi, J. B., Satish, R. K., Indukuri, S. L., Manishaa, B., & Gadde, P. (2024). Efficacy of smear layer removal at apical third of root canal by different irrigation regimens using XP-endo Shaper: an in vitro SEM study. International Journal of Dental Materials, 6(3), 53–57. https://doi.org/10.37983/IJDM.2024.6301
Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Author Biographies

K Madhu Varma, Vishnu Dental College

Professor, Department of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, Vishnu Dental College, Bhimavaram, Andhra Pradesh, India.

Jagapathi Babu Mavidi, Vishnu Dental College

Postgraduate Student, Department of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, Vishnu Dental College, Bhimavaram, Andhra Pradesh, India.

R Kalyan Satish, Vishnu Dental College

Professor, Department of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, Vishnu Dental College, Bhimavaram, Andhra Pradesh, India.

Sai Lakshmi Indukuri, Vishnu Dental College

Senior Lecturer, Department of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, Vishnu Dental College, Bhimavaram, Andhra Pradesh, India.

Bondada Manishaa, Vishnu Dental College

Postgraduate Student, Department of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, Vishnu Dental College, Bhimavaram, Andhra Pradesh, India.

Praveen Gadde, ESIC Dental College and Hospital

Associate Professor, Department of Public Health Dentistry, ESIC Dental College and Hospital, Kalaburagi, Karnataka, India.

References

  1. Haapasalo M, Shen Y, Wang Z, Gao Y. Irrigation in endodontics. Brit Dent J. 2014; 216:299-303. https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.bdj.2014.204
  2. 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(2):190-193. https://doi.org/10.4103/JCD.JCD_155_17
  3. Shahravan A, Haghdoost AA, Adl A, Rahimi H, Shadifar F. Effect of smear layer on sealing ability of canal obturation: A systematic review and meta analysis. J Endod. 2007; 33:96 105. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2006.10.007
  4. Velozo C, Albuquerque D. Micro-computed Tomography Studies of the Effectiveness of XP-endo Shaper in Root Canal Preparation: A Review of the Literature. Scientific World J. 2019 Aug 19; 2019:3570870. https://doi.org/10.1155/2019/3570870
  5. 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. J Endod. 2020;46(9):1228-34. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2020.06.007
  6. Divya S, Sujatha S. Evaluation of Antimicrobial effect of Triphala versus conventional root canal irrigants in primary teeth-An In vivo study. Res J Pharm Technol. 2019;12(2):655-9. https://doi.org/10.5958/0974-360X.2019.00116.1
  7. Zehnder M, Schmidlin P, Sener B, Waltimo T. Chelation in root canal therapy reconsidered. J Endod 2005; 31:817?20. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.don.0000158233.59316.fe
  8. Rajarajan G, Priyadarshini SP, Subbarao C. Effect of Different Irrigating Solutions in the Removal of Smear Layer from the Root Canal. Res J Pharm Technol. 2019;12(3):1115-8. https://doi.org/10.5958/0974-360X.2019.00183.5
  9. Rathakrishnan M, Sukumaran VG, Subbiya A. To Evaluate the Efficacy of an Innovative Irrigant on Smear Layer Removal - SEM Analysis. J Clin Diagn Res. 2016 Apr;10(4): ZC104-6. https://doi.org/10.7860/JCDR/2016/17200.7685
  10. Ruqshan Anjum MG, Sujatha I, Sharath Chandra SM, Antimicrobial efficacy of various irrigating solutions on E. faecalis in root canals: an in-vitro study, Int J Appl Dent Sci. 2015;1(4):94-97.
  11. Zehnder M. Root canal irrigants. J Endod. 2006;32(5):389-98. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2005.09.014
  12. 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. Int Endod J. 2019;52(9):1274-82. https://doi.org/10.1111/iej.13129
  13. Shaheen NA. The efficacy of different single file systems in cleaning oval shaped root canal. Tanta Dent J. 2019;16(2):73. https://doi.org/10.4103/tdj.tdj_46_18
  14. Hülsmann M, Rümmelin C, Schäfers F. Root canal cleanliness after preparation with different endodontic handpieces and hand instruments: a comparative SEM investigation. J Endod. 1997;23(5):301-6. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0099-2399(97)80410-4
  15. Yu DC, Schilder H. Cleaning and shaping the apical third of a root canal system. Gen Dent. 2001;49(3):266-270.
  16. Gulabivala K, Ng YL, Gilbertson M, Eames I. The fluid mechanics of root canal irrigation. Physiol Meas. 2010;31(12): R49-84. https://doi.org/10.1088/0967-3334/31/12/R01
  17. 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 Dec;11(1):1-9. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2342-11-14
  18. Markvart M, Darvann TA, Larsen P, Dalstra M, Kreiborg S, Bjørndal L. Micro?CT analyses of apical enlargement and molar root canal complexity. Int Endod J. 2012;45(3):273-81. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2591.2011.01972.x
  19. 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. J Endod. 2014;40(11):1860-4. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2014.06.023
  20. 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. J Endod. 2017;43(9):1532-8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2017.04.022
  21. Khademi A, Yazdizadeh M, Feizianfard M. Determination of the Minimum Instrumentation Size for Penetration of Irrigants to the Apical Third of Root Canal Systems. J Endod. 2006;32(5):417–420. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2005.11.008
  22. Hata G, Uemura M, Weine FS, Toda T: Removal of smear layer in the root canal using oxidative potential water. J Endod. 1996, 22:643-5. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0099-2399(96)80056-2
  23. Murugesan K, Vishwanath S, Kadandale S, Thanikachalam Y, Parthasarathy R, Ilango S. Comparative Evaluation of Smear Layer Removal in Apical Third Using Four Different Irrigants with Ultrasonic Agitation: An In Vitro Scanning Electron Microscopy (SEM) Analysis. Cureus. 2022;14(3):e23142. https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.23142
  24. 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. J Endod. 2012;38(5):692-5. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2011.12.019
  25. Fortea L, Sanz-Serrano D, Luz LB, Bardini G, Mercade M. Update on chelating agents in endodontic treatment: A systematic review. J Clin Exp Dent. 2024;16(4): e516-e538. https://doi.org/10.4317/jced.60989

Most read articles by the same author(s)