In vitro techniques for evaluating smear layer removal by root canal irrigants: a literature review.

Luis Hernán Carrillo Varguez, A. Serrano-Medina, E. A. López Maldonado, Eustolia Rodríguez Velázquez, J. Cornejo-Bravo
{"title":"In vitro techniques for evaluating smear layer removal by root canal irrigants: a literature review.","authors":"Luis Hernán Carrillo Varguez, A. Serrano-Medina, E. A. López Maldonado, Eustolia Rodríguez Velázquez, J. Cornejo-Bravo","doi":"10.56935/hij.v1i2.16","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Introduction: The purpose of this review is to address the most commonly used techniques for evaluating smear layer removal ability or chelating capacity of root canal irrigants, including Energy Dispersive X-Ray Spectroscopy (EDS or EDX), Atomic Absorption Flame Spectrometry (AASF), wavelength dispersive X-ray fluorescence spectrometry (WDXRF), inductive coupled plasma emission spectroscopy (ICP-AES), Scanning Electron Microscopy (SEM), and Fourier Transform Infrared Spectroscopy (FTIR). Methods: An electronic literature search was conducted in the Pub Med / MEDLINE database of indexed journals from 1992 to 2020. The search terms included chelating, chelation, calcium chelation, smear layer, smear layer removal, and demineralizing effect. Results: All the techniques were classified in terms of their results, both quantitatively and qualitatively. Even though smear layer removal and chelating capacity are not the same parameters, most of the studies included both techniques to correlate their results. SEM is the most commonly used technique for evaluating smear layer removal using various root canal irrigants. Ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA) (17%) was the most widely studied root canal irrigant. Conclusion: Different techniques can be used to evaluate smear layer removal and chelating capacity of root canal irrigants. All of these methods have their corresponding advantages and disadvantages. This study aimed to provide researchers with a background for the selection of technique(s) to study the irrigant´s capacity for calcium chelation, which is applicable to smear layer removal","PeriodicalId":504898,"journal":{"name":"Horizon Interdisciplinary Journal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Horizon Interdisciplinary Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.56935/hij.v1i2.16","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: The purpose of this review is to address the most commonly used techniques for evaluating smear layer removal ability or chelating capacity of root canal irrigants, including Energy Dispersive X-Ray Spectroscopy (EDS or EDX), Atomic Absorption Flame Spectrometry (AASF), wavelength dispersive X-ray fluorescence spectrometry (WDXRF), inductive coupled plasma emission spectroscopy (ICP-AES), Scanning Electron Microscopy (SEM), and Fourier Transform Infrared Spectroscopy (FTIR). Methods: An electronic literature search was conducted in the Pub Med / MEDLINE database of indexed journals from 1992 to 2020. The search terms included chelating, chelation, calcium chelation, smear layer, smear layer removal, and demineralizing effect. Results: All the techniques were classified in terms of their results, both quantitatively and qualitatively. Even though smear layer removal and chelating capacity are not the same parameters, most of the studies included both techniques to correlate their results. SEM is the most commonly used technique for evaluating smear layer removal using various root canal irrigants. Ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA) (17%) was the most widely studied root canal irrigant. Conclusion: Different techniques can be used to evaluate smear layer removal and chelating capacity of root canal irrigants. All of these methods have their corresponding advantages and disadvantages. This study aimed to provide researchers with a background for the selection of technique(s) to study the irrigant´s capacity for calcium chelation, which is applicable to smear layer removal
评估根管冲洗剂去除涂片层的体外技术:文献综述。
简介:原子吸收火焰光谱法 (AASF)、波长色散 X 射线荧光光谱法 (WDXRF)、感应耦合等离子体发射光谱法 (ICP-AES)、扫描电子显微镜 (SEM) 和傅立叶变换红外光谱法 (FTIR)。 研究方法在 Pub Med / MEDLINE 数据库中对 1992 年至 2020 年的索引期刊进行了电子文献检索。检索词包括螯合、螯合、钙螯合、涂片层、涂片层去除和脱矿效应。 研究结果所有技术都根据其定量和定性结果进行了分类。尽管去污层和螯合能力并不是相同的参数,但大多数研究都采用了这两种技术来关联其结果。扫描电镜是评估各种根管冲洗剂去除涂抹层情况最常用的技术。乙二胺四乙酸(EDTA)(17%)是研究最多的根管冲洗剂。 结论:可以使用不同的技术来评估根管冲洗剂的涂抹层去除和螯合能力。所有这些方法都有其相应的优缺点。本研究旨在为研究人员选择适用于涂片层去除的灌洗剂钙螯合能力研究技术提供背景资料。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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