Efficacy of different instruments for the mechanical removal of the smear layer in immediate post preparations: a comparative study.

Abstract

Adhesively cemented fiber-reinforced composite posts are commonly used to reconstruct endodontically treated teeth. Adhesion to intraradicular dentin is complex, and close contact between the resin cements and the dentin is essential. The removal of the smear layer following post space preparation (secondary smear layer) can improve this integration. Different mechanical systems have been used to activate the irrigant inside the root canal. The purpose of this study was to compare, ex-vivo, the removal of the smear layer from the walls of the immediate post space preparation by the action of three mechanized instruments. Forty premolar specimens with a single root canal were selected, endodontically treated, and shaped for glass fiber post cementation with Peeso reamer #1 (Dentsply Sirona, Switzerland) and Macrolock finishing drill #3 (RTD, France). The specimens were randomly divided into 4 groups (n=10): Group C (control); Group PUI (passive ultrasonic irrigation); Group CEP (Rotoprox brush, Hager Werken, Germany) and Group XP (XP-endo Finisher, FKG Dentaire, Switzerland). Post space surfaces were cleaned with 3mL of distilled water; each specimen root split longitudinally to expose the root canals, and prepared for examination in a scanning electron microscope at magnification 350X. The results were analyzed using the Kruskal-Wallis and Friedman tests (p>0.05). RESULTS: Statistically significant differences (p<0.05) were found between Groups C and XP in all three root regions, but not between Groups C, CEP and PIU. Of these, Group CEP showed a better trend in the results of the coronary and middle thirds, without significant difference with Group XP. Although it was difficult to achieve a clean dentin surface after preparation for the fiberglass post, the XP-endo Finisher was the most efficient in removing secondary smear layer, followed by the Rotoprox conical brush.