Evaluation of smear layer removal after use of a canal brush: an SEM study
Evaluation of smear layer removal after use of a canal brush: an SEM study
复制标题
DOI：
10.1016/j.tripleo.2010.02.037
复制
发表时间：
2010-08-01
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Hatipoglu, Seda
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Garip, Yildiz;Sazak, Hesna;Hatipoglu, Seda
Objective.本研究的目的是评价使用新型CanalBrush（Coltene/Whaledent GmbH+Co. KG，德国）后的玷污层清除情况。20颗离体上颌前牙随机分为2组。每组牙齿的根管均使用ProTaper Universal旋转锉（Dentsply Maillefer，Switzerland）进行器械固定。两组根管均用5.25%NaOCl和15%EDTA冲洗。在器械操作结束时，第2组用15%EDTA冲洗根管，然后用CanalBrush冲洗30秒，最后用5.25%NaOCl冲洗。对所有牙齿进行扫描电子显微镜（SEM）检查，并在根尖、中牙和冠状面三分之一检查玷污层的去除情况。SEM图像分析由2名独立评估者以盲法和4分评分系统进行。第2组根管中、根尖1/3的平均评分低于第1组，但差异无统计学意义。两组冠状面评分无显著性差异（P> 0.05）。冲洗与刷牙往往会产生更清洁的运河壁，但冲洗刷牙并没有显着优于单独冲洗在去除玷污层的运河壁。(Oral外科口腔医学口腔病理学口腔放射学Endod 2010;110：e62-e66）
Objective. The objective of this study was to evaluate smear layer removal after using the new CanalBrush (Coltene/Whaledent GmbH+Co. KG, Germany).Study design. Twenty extracted maxillary anterior teeth were randomly divided into 2 equal groups. The canals of the teeth in each group were instrumented with ProTaper Universal rotary files (Dentsply Maillefer, Switzerland). Following each file use, the root canals in both groups were irrigated with 5.25% NaOCl and 15% EDTA. At the end of instrumentation, the canals in group 2 were flushed with 15% EDTA, then a CanalBrush was used for 30 seconds, and a final irrigation was conducted with 5.25% NaOCl. All teeth were processed for scanning electron microscopy (SEM), and the removal of the smear layer was examined in the apical, middle, and coronal thirds. Analyses of SEM images were performed by 2 independent evaluators in a blinded manner and using a 4-point scoring system.Results. The middle and apical thirds of the root canals in group 2 showed lower average scores than those in group 1, but the difference was not statistically significant. There was no significant difference in the coronal score between the groups (P>.05).Conclusions. Irrigating with brushing tended to produce cleaner canal walls, but irrigating brushing was not significantly better than irrigation alone in removing the smear layer on the canal walls. (Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 2010;110:e62-e66)