Jain Mahak, Singhal Anurag, Gurtu Anuraag, Vinayak Vineet
Consultant Endodontist, Ramlal Memorial Charitable Hospital , Sahanpur, Uttar Pradesh, India .
Head of Department, Department of Conservative Dentistry & Endodontics, Institute of Dental Sciences , Bareilly, Uttar Pradesh, India .
J Clin Diagn Res. 2015 May;9(5):ZC11-5. doi: 10.7860/JCDR/2015/12127.5864. Epub 2015 May 1.
Ultrasonic irrigation has been proved for its remarkable cleaning efficiency in the field of endodontics. But its role in endodontic re-treatment has been understated. There is not much data available to understand the effect of ultrasonic irrigation for the evaluation of cleanliness of dentinal tubules when it is used with or without chloroform, a gutta percha solvent during endodontic retreatment.
To compare the influence of ultrasonic irrigation with syringe irrigation on cleanliness of dentinal tubules after gutta perch removal for endodontic retreatment with or without the use of chloroform a gutta percha solvent using scanning electron microscope (SEM).
Freshly extracted 45 human mandibular premolar teeth for periodontal and orthodontic reasons were taken and were occlusally adjusted to a working length of 19 mm. The root canals of all teeth were prepared chemo mechanically to a master apical file size 40 and were divided in various groups. In Group 1 (n = 5; control group), the canals remained unfilled. In Groups 2 and 3 (n = 20 each), the canals were filled using lateral compaction with gutta-percha and AH plus sealer, removal of root fillings was undertaken after 2 weeks using Gates Glidden drills and H files without chloroform in Group 2 and with chloroform in group 3. The specimen of Group 2 and 3 were further divided into two subgroups I and II (n=10). In subgroup I, irrigation was done using side vented needles and sodium hypochlorite. In subgroup II irrigation was done using passive ultrasonic irrigation with sodium hypochlorite. Thereafter, the roots were split and the sections were observed under SEM. The number of occluded dentinal tubules /total number of dentinal tubules were calculated for the coronal, middle and apical third of each root half. Statistical analysis was performed using one-way ANOVA followed by Tukey's test using standardized technique.
Results indicated that the cleanest dentinal tubules were found in the control group (Group 1 where the canals were unfilled) followed by the non chloroform group with ultrasonic irrigation (Group 3 subdivision II) followed by chloroform group with ultrasonic irrigation (Group 2 subdivision II), the non chloroform group with syringe irrigation (Group 3 subdivision I) and least cleanliness was found in the chloroform group with syringe irrigation (Group 2 subdivision I).
Under the limitations of this study it could be concluded that both ultrasonic and syringe irrigation showed cleaner canals when chloroform was not used. Irrigation when done with ultrasonics leads to cleaner tubules than syringe irrigation. Hence, mechanical methods of retrieval in conjunction with use of passive ultrasonic irrigation should be a part of retreatment protocol.
超声冲洗在牙髓病学领域已被证明具有显著的清洁效率。但其在牙髓再治疗中的作用一直未得到充分重视。在牙髓再治疗过程中,当使用或不使用氯仿(一种牙胶溶剂)时,关于超声冲洗对牙本质小管清洁度评估影响的数据并不多。
使用扫描电子显微镜(SEM)比较超声冲洗与注射器冲洗对牙髓再治疗中去除牙胶后牙本质小管清洁度的影响,无论是否使用氯仿(一种牙胶溶剂)。
因牙周和正畸原因新鲜拔除45颗人下颌前磨牙,将其咬合面调至工作长度19mm。所有牙齿的根管经化学机械预备至主尖锉40号,并分为不同组。第1组(n = 5;对照组),根管未充填。第2组和第3组(每组n = 20),根管采用侧向加压法用牙胶和AH plus封闭剂充填,第2组在2周后使用盖茨钻和H锉在不使用氯仿的情况下去除根充物,第3组在使用氯仿的情况下去除根充物。第2组和第3组的标本进一步分为两个亚组I和II(n = 10)。在亚组I中,使用侧孔针和次氯酸钠进行冲洗。在亚组II中,使用被动超声冲洗和次氯酸钠进行冲洗。此后,将牙根劈开,在SEM下观察切片。计算每个牙根半段的冠部、中部和根尖三分之一处闭塞牙本质小管的数量/牙本质小管总数。采用单因素方差分析,然后使用标准化技术进行Tukey检验进行统计分析。
结果表明,对照组(第1组,根管未充填)的牙本质小管最清洁,其次是不使用氯仿且采用超声冲洗的组(第3组亚组II),然后是使用氯仿且采用超声冲洗的组(第2组亚组II),不使用氯仿且采用注射器冲洗的组(第3组亚组I),使用氯仿且采用注射器冲洗的组(第2组亚组I)清洁度最低。
在本研究的局限性下,可以得出结论,当不使用氯仿时,超声冲洗和注射器冲洗均显示根管更清洁。超声冲洗比注射器冲洗能使小管更清洁。因此,机械取出方法结合被动超声冲洗应成为再治疗方案的一部分。