Search

The success of endodontic treatment relies on both apical and coronal sealing. To achieve a good three-dimensional seal, the removal of the smear layer becomes mandatory. This study aims to assess the difference in debris accumulation and smear layer formation while using automated root canal irrigation and conventional syringe needle irrigation. Single-rooted human mandibular premolar teeth (n = 30) which were indicated for orthodontic extractions were selected. An endodontic access cavity was prepared, and a glide path was created. Based on the irrigation protocol decided upon for the study, the teeth were randomly allocated into three study groups, namely Group 1, where the manual syringe needle irrigation method was adopted; Group 2, in which automated root canal irrigation was undertaken; and Group 3, in which teeth remained un-instrumented as it was considered the Control group. The teeth were decoronated at the cement-enamel junction (CEJ) and were subjected for scanning electron microscopy (SEM) examination. Debris and smear layers were viewed in 1000× magnification and scored. A statistically significant (p < 0.05) lower mean debris and smear layer score (p < 0.05) was observed in both study groups when compared with the control group. However, no significant difference (p > 0.05) in the debris and smear layer was observed between the manual syringe needle irrigation and automated irrigation, although automated irrigation devices can be a potential alternative. The present study concluded that the efficacy of smear layer removal remained the same with both automated irrigation and manual syringe irrigation.

The present study aimed to evaluate if commonly used endodontic irrigants such as 3% sodium hypochlorite (NaOCl, Prime Dental, Thane, India), 2% chlorhexidine (CHX, Sigma-Aldrich Co., St. Louis, MO, USA), and 17% ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA, Meta-Biomed Co. Ltd., Cheongju-si, South Korea) influenced the setting time and metal composition of different base endodontic sealers on exposure. AH Plus (Dentsply De Trey GmbH, Konstanz, Germany), Sealapex (SybronEndo, Orange, CA, USA), mineral trioxide aggregate (MTA) Fillapex (Angelus Soluções Odontológicas, Londrina, Brazil), and Tubli-Seal (Kerr Dental, Orange, CA, USA) were selected as the different base representatives of endodontic sealers. These sealers were exposed to 3% NaOCl, 2% CHX, and 17% EDTA, and the individual setting time of the sealers was analyzed. The samples were analyzed for heavy metal elements such as chromium (Cr), nickel (Ni), cobalt (Co), cadmium (Cd), arsenic (As), mercury (Hg), lead (Pb), and beryllium (Be) by using inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry (ICP-MS) analysis. For statistical analysis, one-way ANOVA and post hoc Tukey's tests were used. All selected sealers showed variation in setting time post-exposure to different irrigants. MTA Fillapex had the shortest mean setting time (215.7 min, post-exposure at 187.3 min) (p < 0.05). Mean setting time was also affected for AH Plus (479.6 min, post-exposure at 423.9 min) (p < 0.05) and Tubli-Seal (514.7 min, post-exposure at 465.2 min) (p < 0.05). Sealapex showed the maximum reduction of setting time (864.8 min, post-exposure at 673.4 min) (p < 0.05). All tested sealers showed heavy metals (Cr, Ni, Co, Cd, As, Hg, and Pb) in their composition, and the quantities were influenced by interaction with different irrigants. The heavy metal Be was not seen in any of the samples. Sealapex showed the longest setting time in comparison to other test sealers. Heavy metals were most present in Sealapex, followed by AH Plus, Tubli-Seal, and MTA Fillapex. MTA Fillapex was seen to have the shortest setting time, and heavy metal composition was least affected on interaction with different commonly used endodontic irrigants. Further, this study provides significant insight into the influence of different endodontic irrigants on interaction with different base endodontic sealers, which has not been reported previously, and future studies should emphasize endodontic irrigant-sealer interactions and their possible effects in the long run. Sin financiación 4.329 JCR (2020) Q1, 18/90 Polymer Science 0.770 SJR (2020) Q1, 103/446 Chemistry (miscellaneous) No data IDR 2020 UEM