Garip Yildiz, Sazak Hesna, Gunday Mahir, Hatipoglu Seda
Department of Endodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Marmara University, Istanbul, Turkey.
Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2010 Aug;110(2):e62-6. doi: 10.1016/j.tripleo.2010.02.037. Epub 2010 Jun 23.
The objective of this study was to evaluate smear layer removal after using the new CanalBrush (Coltene/Whaledent GmbH+Co. KG, Germany).
Twenty extracted maxillary anterior teeth were randomly divided into 2 equal groups. The canals of the teeth in each group were instrumented with ProTaper Universal rotary files (Dentsply Maillefer, Switzerland). Following each file use, the root canals in both groups were irrigated with 5.25% NaOCl and 15% EDTA. At the end of instrumentation, the canals in group 2 were flushed with 15% EDTA, then a CanalBrush was used for 30 seconds, and a final irrigation was conducted with 5.25% NaOCl. All teeth were processed for scanning electron microscopy (SEM), and the removal of the smear layer was examined in the apical, middle, and coronal thirds. Analyses of SEM images were performed by 2 independent evaluators in a blinded manner and using a 4-point scoring system.
The middle and apical thirds of the root canals in group 2 showed lower average scores than those in group 1, but the difference was not statistically significant. There was no significant difference in the coronal score between the groups (P > .05).
Irrigating with brushing tended to produce cleaner canal walls, but irrigating brushing was not significantly better than irrigation alone in removing the smear layer on the canal walls.
本研究的目的是评估使用新型根管刷（德国科尔tene/伟瓦登特股份两合公司）后牙本质玷污层的去除情况。
将20颗拔除的上颌前牙随机分为两组，每组数量相等。每组牙齿的根管均使用ProTaper通用旋转锉（瑞士登士柏迈弗公司）进行预备。每次使用锉后，两组根管均用5.25%次氯酸钠和15%乙二胺四乙酸冲洗。在预备结束时，第2组根管先用15%乙二胺四乙酸冲洗，然后使用根管刷30秒，最后用5.25%次氯酸钠冲洗。所有牙齿均进行扫描电子显微镜（SEM）检查，并在根尖、根中及冠方三分之一处观察玷污层的去除情况。由2名独立评估者以盲法使用4分评分系统对SEM图像进行分析。
第2组根管的根中及根尖三分之一处平均评分低于第1组，但差异无统计学意义。两组在冠方评分上无显著差异（P>.05）。
冲洗联合刷洗往往能使根管壁更清洁，但在去除根管壁玷污层方面，冲洗联合刷洗并不显著优于单纯冲洗。
