In this ex vivo study, the surface cleanliness of root canal walls after shaping with Ni-Ti instruments and irrigating with different endodontic solutions was evaluated by SEM.
Methods
50 single-rooted teeth were divided into 5 groups. All root canals were shaped with Revo-S™ (MICRO-MEGA®, Besancon, France) rotary Ni-Ti instruments and irrigated with NaOCl, varying the final rinse: NaOCl, Tetraclean, 17% EDTA, Cloreximid, Tetraclean liquid not mixed with powder. Specimens were fractured longitudinally and prepared for SEM analysis in order to evaluate the presence/absence of smear layer and the presence/absence of open tubules at the coronal, middle, and apical third of each canal, using a 3-step scale for scores. Numeric data were analyzed using Kruskall-Wallis test and Mann-Whitney U test and significance was predetermined at p<0.05.
Results
This study showed significant differences between the various groups. The 5.25% NaOCl + Tetraclean and 5.25% NaOCl + 17% E.D.T.A. groups had significantly lower scores than other groups (p<0.001), with no significant difference between them.
Conclusions
Final rinse with Tetraclean is effective in removing the smear layer, leaving a high number of opened dentin tubules.
Abou-RassM., PiccininoM.V.. The effectiveness of four clinical irrigation methods on the removal of root canal debris.Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod1982; 53: 524–6.
3.
BriseñoB.M., WirthR., HammG., StandhartingerW.. Efficacy of different irrigation methods and concentrations of root canal irrigation solutions on bacteria in the root canal.Endod Dent Traumatol1992; 8: 6–11.
4.
KaplanA.E., PiccaM., BonzalezM.I., MacchiR.L., MolgatiniS.L.. Antimicrobial effect of six endodontic sealers: an in vitro evaluation.Endod Dent Traumatol1999; 15: 42–5.
5.
MickelA.K., NguyenT.H., ChogleS.. Antimicrobial activity of endodontic sealers on Enterococcus faecalis.J Endod2003; 29: 257–8.
6.
BrownJ.I., DoranJ.E.. An in vitro evaluation of the particle flotation capability of various irrigating solutions.J Calif Dent Assoc1975; 3: 60–3.
7.
D'ArcangeloC., VarvaraG., De FazioP.. An evaluation of the action of different root canal irrigants on facoltative aerobic-anaerobic, obligate anaerobic, and microaerophilic bacteriaJ Endod1999; 25: 351–3.
8.
JeansonneM.J., WhiteR.R.. A comparison of 2.0% chlorhexidine gluconate and 5.25% sodium hypochlorite as antimicrobial endodontic irrigants.J Endod1994; 20: 276–8.
9.
SiqueiraJ.F.Jr., BatistaM.M., FragaR., de UzedaM.. Antibacterial effects of endodontic irrigants on black-pigmented Gram-negative anaerobes and facultative bacteria.J Endod1998; 24: 414–6.
10.
SundqvistG., FigdorD., PerssonS., SjogrenU.. Microbiologic analysis of teeth with failed endodontic treatment and the outcome of conservative retreatment.Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod1998; 85: 86–93.
11.
ShabahangS., PouresmailM., TorabinejadM.. In vitro antimicrobial efficacy of MTAD and sodium hypochlorite.J Endod2003; 29: 450–2.
12.
YesilsoyC., WhitakerE., ClevelandD., PhillipsE., TropeM.. Antimicrobial and toxic effects of established and potential root canal irrigants.J Endod1995; 21: 513–5.
13.
AyhanH., SultanN., CirakM., RuhiM.Z., BodurH.. Antimicrobial effects of various endodontic irrigants on selected microorganisms.Int Endod J1999; 32: 99–102.
14.
LinS., ZuckermanO., WeissE.I., MazorY., FussZ.. Antibacterial efficacy of a new chlorhexidine slow release device to disinfect dentinal tubules.J Endod2003; 29: 416–8.
15.
SassoneL.M., FidelR., FidelS., VieiraM., HirataR.. The influence of organic load on the antimicrobial activity of different concentrations of NaOCl and chlorhexidine in vitro.Int Endod J2003; 36: 848–52.
16.
VahdatyA., Pitt FordT.R., WilsonR.F.. Efficacy of chlorhexidine in disinfecting dentinal tubules in vitro.Endod Dent Traumatol1993; 9: 243–8.
17.
ByströmA., SundqvistG.. Bacteriologic evaluation of the effect of 0.5 percent sodium hypochlorite in endodontic therapy.Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod1983; 55: 307–12.
18.
MentzT.C.. The use of sodium hypochlorite as a general endodontic medicament.Int Endod J1982; 15: 132–6.
19.
OharaP.K., TorabinejadM., KetteringJ.D.. Antibacterial effects of various endodontic irrigants on selected anaerobic bacteria.Endod DentTraumatol1993; 9: 95–100.
20.
ShihM., MarshallF.J., RosenS.. The bactericidal efficiency of sodium hypochlorite as an endodontic irrigant.Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod1970; 29: 613–9.
21.
SiqueiraJ.F., MachadoA.G., SilveiraR.M.. Evaluation of the effectiveness of sodium hypochlorite used with three irrigation methods in the elimination of Enterococcus faecalis from the root canal, in vitro.Int Endod J1997; 30: 279–82.
22.
ThèS.D. The solvent action of sodium hypochlorite on fixed and unfixed necrotic tissue.Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod1979; 47: 558–61.
23.
TürkünM., CengizT.. The effect of sodium hypochlorite and calcium hydroxide on tissue dissolution and root canal cleanliness.Int Endod J1997; 30: 335–42.
24.
TorabinejadM., KhademiA.A., BabagoliJ.. A new solution for the removal of the smear layer.J Endod2003; 29: 170–5.
25.
GiardinoL., PecoraG., AmbuE., SavoldiE.. A new irrigant in the treatment of apical periodontitis: from research to clinic. 12th Biennial Congress European Society of Endodontology, Dublin, September 2005; 15–7.
26.
IngleJ.I.. Ingle's Endodontics 6.Hamilton, Ontario: BC Decker; 2008.
27.
GiardinoL., AmbuE., BecceC., RimondiniL., MorraM.. Surface tension comparison of four common root canal irrigants and two new irrigants containing antibiotic.J Endod2006; 32: 1091–3.
28.
FoschiF., NucciC., MontebugnoliL.. SEM evaluation of canal wall dentine following use of Mtwo and Protaper NiTi rotary instruments.Int Endod J2004; 37: 832–9.
29.
MontanaroL., CampocciaD., RizziS.. Evaluation of bacterial adhesion of Streptococcus mutans on dental restorative materials.Biomaterials2004; 25: 4457–63.
30.
PoggioC., ArciolaC.R., RostiF., ScribanteA., SainoE., VisaiL.. Adhesion of Streptococcus mutans to different restorative materials.Int J Artif Organs2009; 32: 671–7.
31.
ArciolaC.R., AlviF.I., AnY.H.. Implant infection and infection resistant materials: a mini review.Int J Artif Organs2005; 28: 1119–25.
32.
AnY.H., AlviF.I., KangQ.. Effects of sterilization on implant mechanical property and biocompatibility.Int J Artif Organs.2005; 28: 1126–37.
33.
BeruttiE., MariniR., AngerettiA.. Penetration ability of different irrigants into dentinal tubules.J Endod1997; 23: 725–7.
34.
GomesB.P., SouzaS.F., FerrazC.C., TeixeiraF.B., ZaiaA.A., ValdrighiL.. Effectiveness of 2% chlorhexidine gel and calcium hydroxide against Enterococcus faecalis in bovine root dentine in vitro.Int Endod J2003; 36: 267–75.
35.
BuiT.B., BaumgartnerJ.C., MitchellJ.C.. Evaluation of the interaction between sodium hypochlorite and chlorhexidine gluconate and its effect on the root dentin.J Endod2008; 34: 181–5.
36.
BasraniB.R., ManekS., SodhiR.N., FilleryE., ManzurA.. Interaction between sodium hypochlorite and chlorhexidine gluconate.J Endod2007; 33: 966–9.
37.
GiardinoL., AmbuE., SavoldiE., RimondiniL., CassinelliC., DebbiaE.A.. Comparative evaluation of antimicrobial efficacy of sodium hypochlorite, MTAD, and Tetraclean against Enterococcus faecalis biofilm.J Endod2007; 33: 852–5.
38.
GiardinoL., AmbuE., RimondiniL., PalezonaA., DebbiaE.A.. Antimicrobial effect of MTAD, Tetraclean, Cloreximid and Sodium Hypochlorite on three common endodontic pathogens.Indian J Dent Res2009; 20: 391–6.
39.
NegliaR., ArdizzoniA., GiardinoL.. Comparative in vitro and ex vivo studies on the bactericidal activity of Tetraclean, a new generation endodontic irrigant, and sodium hypochlorite.New Microbiol2008; 31: 57–65.
