Evaluation of canal cleanliness and tubular penetration of root canal sealers in extracted primary second molars: a SEM study

GÜLER, MEHMET SAMİ; Guler, Cigdem; yılmaz, yücel; GÜRBÜZ, Taşkın

Evaluation of canal cleanliness and tubular penetration of root canal sealers in extracted primary second molars: a SEM study

ÇİĞDEM GÜLER, (İnönü Üniversitesi, Diş Hekimliği Fakültesi, Pedodonti Anabilim Dalı, Malatya, Türkiye)

Taşkın GÜRBÜZ, (Atatürk Üniversitesi, Diş Hekimliği Fakültesi, Pedodonti Anabilim Dalı, Erzurum, Türkiye)

Yücel YILMAZ, (Atatürk Üniversitesi, Diş Hekimliği Fakültesi, Pedodonti Anabilim Dalı, Erzurum, Türkiye)

Mehmet Sami GÜLER (Atatürk Üniversitesi, Makine Mühendisliği, Bölümü, Erzurum, Türkiye)

Cumhuriyet Dental Journal

0 0

Yıl: 2013 Cilt: 16 Sayı: 2 Sayfa Aralığı: 116 - 124 Metin Dili: İngilizce İndeks Tarihi: 29-07-2022

Evaluation of canal cleanliness and tubular penetration of root canal sealers in extracted primary second molars: a SEM study

Öz:

Objectives: To evaluate the remaining debris/smear after canal preparation, and the penetration of root canal sealers into dentinal tubules in extracted primary second molars, using scanning electron microscopy (SEM). Materials and Methods: The widest roots of 120 recently extracted human primary second molars were used. The roots were randomly distributed into four groups, according to instrumentation techniques [conventional stainless-steel hand files / nickel-titanium (Ni-Ti) rotary files] and irrigation solutions [0.5% sodium hypochlorite (NaOCl) and 0.9% saline solution/0.4% chlorhexidine gluconate (CHX)] employed. The debris/smear layer remaining after instrumentation/irrigation, and the tubular penetration of root canal sealers [zinc oxide and eugenol (ZOE)/Apexit Plus (AP)] were evaluated using SEM. All data were analyzed statistically using the Kruskal-Wallis and Mann-Whitney U tests. Results: No significant difference was found between the debris/smear layer scores based on root canal preparation technique and irrigant solution (P>0.05). ZOE cement was unable to enter dentinal tubules, while AP-based calcium hydroxide was able to gain limited entry to the tubules of some roots, but not others. Conclusions: No differences in canal cleanliness were noted among the instrumentation and irrigant protocols evaluated. AP was found in this SEM study to penetrate the dentinal tubules of prepared primary molar root canals more effectively than ZOE; though, penetration with AP was not noted in every root canal.

Anahtar Kelime:

Konular: Diş Hekimliği

Belge Türü: Makale Makale Türü: Araştırma Makalesi Erişim Türü: Bibliyografik

1. Silva LAB, Leonardo MR, Nelson- Filho P, Tanomaru JMG. Comparison of rotary and manual instrumentation techniques on cleaning capacity and instrumentation time in deciduous molars. J Dent Child 2004;71:45-47.
2. Barr ES, Kleier D, Barr NV. Use of nickel-titanium rotary files for root canal preparation in primary teeth. Pediatr Dent 1999;21:453-454.
3. Kummer TR, Calvo MC, Cordeiro MMR, Vieira RS, Rocha MJ, Catarina FS. Ex vivo study of manual and rotary instrumentation techniques in human primary teeth. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 2008;105:e84-e92.
4. Nagaratna PJ, Shahhikiran ND, Subbareddy VV. In vitro comparison of NiTi rotary instruments and stainless steel hand instruments in root canal preparations of primary and permanent molar. J Indian Soc Pedod Prev Dent 2006;24:186-191.
5. Canoglu H, Tekcicek MU, Cehreli ZC. Comparison of conventional, rotary, and ultrasonic preparation, different final irrigation regimens, and 2 sealers in primary molar root canal therapy. Pediatr Dent 2006;28:518-523.
6. Önçağ Ö, Hoş gör M, Hilmioğ lu S, Zekioğ lu O, Eronat C, Burhanoğ lu D. Comparison of antibacterial and toxic effects of various root canal irrigants. Int Endod J 2003;36:423- 432.
7. White RR, Goldman M, Lin PS. The influence of the smeared layer upon dentinal tubule penetration by endodontic filling materials. Part II. J Endod 1987;13:369-374.
8. Alaçam A. The effect of various irrigants on the adaptation of paste filling in primary teeth. J Clin Pediatr Dent 1992;16:243-246.
9. Fanning EA. The relationship of dental caries and root resorption of deciduous molars. Arch Oral Biol 1962;7:595-601.
10. Hülsman M, Rümmelin C, Schäfers F. Root canal cleanliness after preparation with different endodontic handpieces and hand instruments: a comparative SEM investigation. J Endod 1997;23:301-306.
11. Kubota K, Golden BE, Penugonda B. Root canal filling materials for primary teeth: a review of the literature. ASDC J Dent Child 1992;59:225-227.
12. Mortazavi M, Mesbahi M. Comparison of zinc oxide eugenol, and Vitapex for root canal treatment of necrotic primary teeth. Int J Paediatr Dent 2004;14:417-424.
13. Rifkin A. A simple, effective, safe technique for the root canal treatment of abscessed primary teeth. ASDC J Dent Child 1980;47:435-441.
14. Rodd HD, Waterhouse PJ, Fuks AB, Fayle SA, Moffat MA; British Society of Paediatric Dentistry. Pulp therapy for primary molars. Int J Paediatr Dent 2006;16:15-23.
15. McComb BD, Smith DL. A preliminary scanning electron microscopy study of root canals after endodontic procedures. J Endod 1975;1:238-242.
16. Abbott PV, Heijkoop PS, Cardaci SC, Hume WR, Heithersay GS. A SEM study of the effects of different irrigation sequences and ultrasonics. Int Endod J 1991;24:308-316.
17. Bechelli C, Orlandini SZ, Colafranceshi M. SEM study on the efficacy of root canal wall debridement of hand versus lightspeed instrumentation. Int Endod J 1999;32:484-493.
18. Cameron JA. Factors affecting the clinical efficiency of ultrasonic endodontics: a scanning electron microscopy study. Int Endod J 1995;28:47-53.
19. McComb BD, Smith DL. Comparison of physical properties of polycarboxylate-based and conventional root canal sealers. J Endod 1976;2:228-235.
20. Ferreira RB, Marchesan MA, Silva- Souza YT, Sousa-Neto M. Effectiveness of root canal debris removal using passive ultrasound irrigation with chlorhexidine diglukonate or sodium hypochlorite individually or in combination as irrigants. J Contemp Dent Pract 2008;9:68-75.
21. Naenni N, Thoma K, Zehnder M. Soft tissue dissolution capacity of currently used and potential endodontic irrigants. J Endod 2004;30:785-787.
22. Pinheiro SL, Araujo G, Bincelli I,Cunha R, Bueno C. Evaluation of cleaning capacity and instrumentation time of manual, hybrid and rotary instrumentation techniques in primary molars. Int Endod J 2012;45:379-385.
23. Gurbuz T, Ozdemir Y, Kara N, Zehir C, Kurudirek M. Evaluation of root canal dentin after Nd:YAG laser irradiation and treatment with five different irrigation solutions: a preliminary study. J Endod 2008;34:318-321.
24. Altundasar E, Ozçelik B, Cehreli ZC, Matsumoto K. Ultramorphological and histochemical changes after ER,CR:YSGG laser irradiation and two different irrigation regimes. J Endod 2006;32:465-468.
25. Hülsmann M, Hackendorff M, Lennon A. Chelating agents in root canal treatment: mode of action and indications for their use. Int Endod J 2003;36:810-830.
26. Gettleman BH, Messer HH, Eldeeb ME. Adhesion of sealer cements to dentin with and without the smear layer. J Endod 1991;17:15-20.
27. Kauvas V, Liolios E, Vassiliadis L, Parissis-Messimeris S, Boutsioukis A. Influence of smear layer on depth of penetration of three endodontic sealers: a SEM study. Endod Dent Traumatol 1998;14:191-195.
28. Torabinejad M, Handysides R, Khademi AA, Bakland LK. Clinical implications of the smear layer in endodontics. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol 2002;94:658-666.
29. Ş en BH, Piş kin B, Baran N. The effect of tubular penetration of root canal sealers on dye microleakage. Int Endod J 1996;29:23-28.
30. Villegas JC, Yoshioka T, Kobayashi C, Suda H. Obturation of accessory canals after four different final irrigation regimes. J Endod 2002;28:534-536.

APA	Guler C, GÜRBÜZ T, yılmaz y, GÜLER M (2013). Evaluation of canal cleanliness and tubular penetration of root canal sealers in extracted primary second molars: a SEM study. , 116 - 124.
Chicago	Guler Cigdem,GÜRBÜZ Taşkın,yılmaz yücel,GÜLER MEHMET SAMİ Evaluation of canal cleanliness and tubular penetration of root canal sealers in extracted primary second molars: a SEM study. (2013): 116 - 124.
MLA	Guler Cigdem,GÜRBÜZ Taşkın,yılmaz yücel,GÜLER MEHMET SAMİ Evaluation of canal cleanliness and tubular penetration of root canal sealers in extracted primary second molars: a SEM study. , 2013, ss.116 - 124.
AMA	Guler C,GÜRBÜZ T,yılmaz y,GÜLER M Evaluation of canal cleanliness and tubular penetration of root canal sealers in extracted primary second molars: a SEM study. . 2013; 116 - 124.
Vancouver	Guler C,GÜRBÜZ T,yılmaz y,GÜLER M Evaluation of canal cleanliness and tubular penetration of root canal sealers in extracted primary second molars: a SEM study. . 2013; 116 - 124.
IEEE	Guler C,GÜRBÜZ T,yılmaz y,GÜLER M "Evaluation of canal cleanliness and tubular penetration of root canal sealers in extracted primary second molars: a SEM study." , ss.116 - 124, 2013.
ISNAD	Guler, Cigdem vd. "Evaluation of canal cleanliness and tubular penetration of root canal sealers in extracted primary second molars: a SEM study". (2013), 116-124.

APA	Guler C, GÜRBÜZ T, yılmaz y, GÜLER M (2013). Evaluation of canal cleanliness and tubular penetration of root canal sealers in extracted primary second molars: a SEM study. Cumhuriyet Dental Journal , 16(2), 116 - 124.
Chicago	Guler Cigdem,GÜRBÜZ Taşkın,yılmaz yücel,GÜLER MEHMET SAMİ Evaluation of canal cleanliness and tubular penetration of root canal sealers in extracted primary second molars: a SEM study. Cumhuriyet Dental Journal 16, no.2 (2013): 116 - 124.
MLA	Guler Cigdem,GÜRBÜZ Taşkın,yılmaz yücel,GÜLER MEHMET SAMİ Evaluation of canal cleanliness and tubular penetration of root canal sealers in extracted primary second molars: a SEM study. Cumhuriyet Dental Journal , vol.16, no.2, 2013, ss.116 - 124.
AMA	Guler C,GÜRBÜZ T,yılmaz y,GÜLER M Evaluation of canal cleanliness and tubular penetration of root canal sealers in extracted primary second molars: a SEM study. Cumhuriyet Dental Journal . 2013; 16(2): 116 - 124.
Vancouver	Guler C,GÜRBÜZ T,yılmaz y,GÜLER M Evaluation of canal cleanliness and tubular penetration of root canal sealers in extracted primary second molars: a SEM study. Cumhuriyet Dental Journal . 2013; 16(2): 116 - 124.
IEEE	Guler C,GÜRBÜZ T,yılmaz y,GÜLER M "Evaluation of canal cleanliness and tubular penetration of root canal sealers in extracted primary second molars: a SEM study." Cumhuriyet Dental Journal , 16, ss.116 - 124, 2013.
ISNAD	Guler, Cigdem vd. "Evaluation of canal cleanliness and tubular penetration of root canal sealers in extracted primary second molars: a SEM study". Cumhuriyet Dental Journal 16/2 (2013), 116-124.