In Vitro Evaluation of Smear Layer and Debris Removal and Antimicrobial Activity of Different Irrigating Solutions.

IF 1.6 Q3 DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE
European Endodontic Journal Pub Date : 2024-01-01 Epub Date: 2023-11-15 DOI:10.14744/eej.2023.19042
Raffaella Castagnola, Cecilia Martini, Mauro Colangeli, Ilaria Pellicciotta, Luca Marigo, Nicola Maria Grande, Francesca Bugli, Gianluca Plotino
{"title":"In Vitro Evaluation of Smear Layer and Debris Removal and Antimicrobial Activity of Different Irrigating Solutions.","authors":"Raffaella Castagnola, Cecilia Martini, Mauro Colangeli, Ilaria Pellicciotta, Luca Marigo, Nicola Maria Grande, Francesca Bugli, Gianluca Plotino","doi":"10.14744/eej.2023.19042","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>The aim of this in vitro study was to compare the smear layer and debris removal and antimicrobial activity of two dual-action irrigating solutions for continuous chelation (Triton; Brasseler, Savannah, USA and Dual Rinse HEDP; Medcem GmbH, Weinfelden, Switzerland) with a dual step irrigation protocol with sodium hypochlorite (NaOCl) followed by ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Thirty single-rooted single-canal teeth were divided into three groups (n=10) and irrigated with Triton, Dual Rinse HEDP mixed with 6% NaOCl and 6% NaOCl/17% EDTA. The teeth were observed under a scanning electron microscope (SEM) to assess the canal wall cleanliness. In addition, 80 dentine discs were contaminated with Candida albicans and 80 discs with Enterococcus faecalis and irrigated with Triton, Dual Rinse HEDP mixed with 6% NaOCl and 6% NaOCl/17% EDTA or not treated (n=20). Fifteen discs were used to evaluate colony-forming units, while 5 discs were analysed by SEM. Data were analysed using the Shapiro- Wilk, Kruskal-Wallis and One-Way ANOVA tests.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Triton was statistically more effective than Dual Rinse HEDP and NaOCl/EDTA in removing debris (p<0.05), except with NaOCl/EDTA in the coronal third. Triton was more effective than Dual Rinse HEDP in removing the smear layer from the apical and middle thirds (p<0.05). All the irrigation protocols significantly re- duced the number of E. faecalis. The Triton group showed the lowest number of remaining C. albicans (p<0.05).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Triton was the most effective irrigation solution in removing debris and as effective as NaOCl/ EDTA in removing the smear layer. Triton showed the highest efficacy against C. albicans. New irrigating solutions that provide continuous chelation may provide an alternative to current irrigation protocols.</p>","PeriodicalId":11860,"journal":{"name":"European Endodontic Journal","volume":" ","pages":"81-88"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10777091/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Endodontic Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.14744/eej.2023.19042","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/11/15 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: The aim of this in vitro study was to compare the smear layer and debris removal and antimicrobial activity of two dual-action irrigating solutions for continuous chelation (Triton; Brasseler, Savannah, USA and Dual Rinse HEDP; Medcem GmbH, Weinfelden, Switzerland) with a dual step irrigation protocol with sodium hypochlorite (NaOCl) followed by ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA).

Methods: Thirty single-rooted single-canal teeth were divided into three groups (n=10) and irrigated with Triton, Dual Rinse HEDP mixed with 6% NaOCl and 6% NaOCl/17% EDTA. The teeth were observed under a scanning electron microscope (SEM) to assess the canal wall cleanliness. In addition, 80 dentine discs were contaminated with Candida albicans and 80 discs with Enterococcus faecalis and irrigated with Triton, Dual Rinse HEDP mixed with 6% NaOCl and 6% NaOCl/17% EDTA or not treated (n=20). Fifteen discs were used to evaluate colony-forming units, while 5 discs were analysed by SEM. Data were analysed using the Shapiro- Wilk, Kruskal-Wallis and One-Way ANOVA tests.

Results: Triton was statistically more effective than Dual Rinse HEDP and NaOCl/EDTA in removing debris (p<0.05), except with NaOCl/EDTA in the coronal third. Triton was more effective than Dual Rinse HEDP in removing the smear layer from the apical and middle thirds (p<0.05). All the irrigation protocols significantly re- duced the number of E. faecalis. The Triton group showed the lowest number of remaining C. albicans (p<0.05).

Conclusion: Triton was the most effective irrigation solution in removing debris and as effective as NaOCl/ EDTA in removing the smear layer. Triton showed the highest efficacy against C. albicans. New irrigating solutions that provide continuous chelation may provide an alternative to current irrigation protocols.

不同冲洗液对涂抹层及碎屑去除及抗菌活性的体外评价。
目的:比较两种双作用连续螯合冲洗液(Triton;Brasseler, Savannah, USA和Dual Rinse HEDP;Medcem GmbH, Weinfelden, Switzerland)采用次氯酸钠(NaOCl)和乙二胺四乙酸(EDTA)两步灌溉方案。方法:30颗单根单根牙分为3组(n=10),分别用Triton、6% NaOCl和6% NaOCl/17% EDTA混合的Dual Rinse HEDP冲洗。在扫描电子显微镜(SEM)下观察牙齿,评估管壁清洁度。另外,80个牙本质盘被白色念珠菌污染,80个牙本质盘被粪肠球菌污染,用Triton、混合6% NaOCl和6% NaOCl/17% EDTA的双重漂洗HEDP冲洗或不处理(n=20)。15个圆盘用于评估菌落形成单位,5个圆盘通过扫描电镜进行分析。使用Shapiro- Wilk、Kruskal-Wallis和单因素方差分析分析数据。结果:Triton冲洗液清除脏物的效果优于Dual Rinse HEDP和NaOCl/EDTA (p)。结论:Triton冲洗液清除脏物的效果最好,清除脏物层的效果与NaOCl/EDTA相同。Triton对白色念珠菌的疗效最高。提供持续螯合的新灌溉解决方案可能为当前的灌溉方案提供另一种选择。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
European Endodontic Journal
European Endodontic Journal DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE-
CiteScore
3.40
自引率
5.60%
发文量
25
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信