Evaluation of the effects of two novel irrigants on intraradicular dentine erosion, debris and smear layer removal

Objectives To evaluate the effects of copolymer of acrylic acid and maleic acid (Poly[AA-co-MA]) and calcium hypochlorite (Ca(OCl)2) on root canal dentin using scanning electron microscope (SEM). Materials and Methods Twenty-four single-rooted teeth were instrumented and the apical and coronal...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Melahat Görduysus, Selen Küçükkaya, Nursel Pekel Bayramgil, Mehmet Ömer Görduysus
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Korean Academy of Conservative Dentistry 2015-08-01
Series:Restorative Dentistry & Endodontics
Online Access:https://doi.org/10.5395/rde.2015.40.3.216
Description
Summary:Objectives To evaluate the effects of copolymer of acrylic acid and maleic acid (Poly[AA-co-MA]) and calcium hypochlorite (Ca(OCl)2) on root canal dentin using scanning electron microscope (SEM). Materials and Methods Twenty-four single-rooted teeth were instrumented and the apical and coronal thirds of each root were removed, leaving the 5 mm middle thirds, which were then separated into two pieces longitudinally. The specimens were randomly divided into six groups and subjected to each irrigant for 5 min as follows: G1, Ca(OCl)2; G2, Poly(AA-co-MA); G3, Ca(OCl)2 + Poly(AA-co-MA); G4, sodium hypochlorite (NaOCl); G5, ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA); G6, NaOCl+EDTA. The specimens were prepared for SEM evaluation. Smear layer, debris and erosion scores were recorded by two blinded examiners. One image from G3 was analyzed with energy dispersive spectroscopy (EDS) on suspicion of precipitate formation. Data were analyzed using the Kruskal-Wallis and Dunn tests. Results G1 and G4 showed the presence of debris and smear layer and they were statistically different from G2, G3, G5 and G6 where debris and smear layer were totally removed (p < 0.05). In G1 and G4, erosion evaluation could not be done because of debris and smear layer. G2, G3 and G5 showed no erosion, and there was no significant difference between them. G6 showed severe erosion and was statistically different from G2, G3 and G5 (p < 0.05). EDS microanalysis showed the presence of Na, P, and Ca elements on the surface. Conclusions Poly(AA-co-MA) is effective in removing the smear layer and debris without causing erosion either alone or with Ca(OCl)2.
ISSN:2234-7658
2234-7666