Pérez-Heredia Mercedes, Ferrer-Luque Carmen María, González-Rodríguez María Paloma
Department of Dental Pathology and Therapeutics, School of Dentistry, University of Granada-Spain, Campus de Cartuja, Granada, Spain.
J Endod. 2006 Oct;32(10):993-7. doi: 10.1016/j.joen.2006.05.016. Epub 2006 Jul 26.
The goal of this study was to evaluate the cleaning ability of three acid irrigating solutions after hand and rotary instrumentation. Eighty human teeth were randomly divided in eight groups. Four groups were prepared with hand instrumentation and other four with ProTaper. The irrigating solutions were 15% citric acid plus 2.5% NaOCl; 15% EDTA plus 2.5% NaOCl; 5% orthophosphoric acid plus 2.5% NaOCl; and 2.5% NaOCl alone as control. Canal walls were observed with scanning electron microscopy, and photomicrographs were taken in apical, middle, and coronal thirds. A scoring system for debris and smear layer was used. Acid solutions with 2.5% NaOCl were effective in the elimination of smear layer or debris, and no significant differences were showed in smear layer removal between techniques. However, 2.5% NaOCl did not remove smear layer or debris, and no significant differences in debris were observed between manual and rotary techniques.
本研究的目的是评估三种酸冲洗液在手动和旋转器械预备后对根管的清洁能力。80颗人牙随机分为八组。四组采用手动器械预备,另外四组采用ProTaper器械预备。冲洗液分别为15%柠檬酸加2.5%次氯酸钠;15%乙二胺四乙酸加2.5%次氯酸钠;5%正磷酸加2.5%次氯酸钠;以及单独使用2.5%次氯酸钠作为对照。通过扫描电子显微镜观察根管壁,并在根尖、根中及冠方三分之一处拍摄显微照片。使用了一个针对碎屑和玷污层的评分系统。含2.5%次氯酸钠的酸性溶液在消除玷污层或碎屑方面有效,且不同预备技术在去除玷污层方面无显著差异。然而,2.5%次氯酸钠不能去除玷污层或碎屑,且在手动和旋转技术之间,碎屑清除情况无显著差异。