• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

冲洗策略对去除根管牙本质玷污层的效果。

Effectiveness of irrigation strategies on the removal of the smear layer from root canal dentin.

机构信息

Discipline of Endodontology, Faculty of Dentistry, The University of Hong Kong, Pok Fu Lam, Hong Kong.

Department of Endodontics and Restorative Dentistry, University of Siena, Siena, Italy.

出版信息

Odontology. 2019 Apr;107(2):142-149. doi: 10.1007/s10266-018-0373-2. Epub 2018 Jun 28.

DOI:10.1007/s10266-018-0373-2
PMID:29956060
Abstract

The aim of this study was to evaluate the removal of the smear layer by some commonly used (needle-and-syringe irrigation, sonic activation, ultrasonically activated irrigation) and new root canal irrigation strategies (negative pressure irrigation and polymer rotary file) using a novel approach by comparing pre- and post-experimental images. Prepared root canals (n = 50) were subjected to a split tooth model and divided into 5 groups (n = 10): (1) needle-and-syringe irrigation (control); (2) sonic activation (SA); (3) negative pressure irrigation with continuous warm activated irrigation and evacuation (CWA); (4) polymer finishing file (FF); (5) ultrasonically activated irrigation (UAI). Smear layer scores and percentage of open dentinal tubules (%ODT) were evaluated by 2 examiners before and after irrigation procedures, from the middle and apical thirds of the root canal, on scanning electron microscopic images. Data were analysed using Kruskal-Wallis and post hoc tests at P = 0.05. Needle-and-syringe irrigation (control) showed no significant difference (both smear score and %ODT) compared to the pre-experimental value (P > 0.05). All other groups showed lower smear scores and higher %ODT, compared to the control (P < 0.05). The lowest smear score and highest %ODT were observed in the CWA group, which was significantly different from all other groups (P < 0.05). SA group showed significantly higher smear scores and lower %ODT than FF or UAI (P < 0.05). CWA showed superior removal of smear layer in the middle and apical thirds of the root canal compared to the other irrigation strategies.

摘要

本研究旨在通过比较实验前后的图像,用一种新的方法评估一些常用(针管冲洗、声激活、超声激活冲洗)和新的根管冲洗策略(负压冲洗和聚合物旋转锉)对玷污层的去除效果。将预备好的根管(n=50)置于分体牙模型中,分为 5 组(n=10):(1)针管冲洗(对照组);(2)声激活(SA);(3)连续温热激活冲洗和抽吸的负压冲洗(CWA);(4)聚合物成型锉(FF);(5)超声激活冲洗(UAI)。在冲洗前后,由 2 名检查者使用扫描电子显微镜图像,从根管的中三分之一和根尖三分之一评估玷污层评分和开放牙本质小管百分比(%ODT)。使用 Kruskal-Wallis 和事后检验进行数据分析,P=0.05。与实验前相比,针管冲洗(对照组)的玷污层评分和%ODT均无显著差异(P>0.05)。与对照组相比,其他所有组的玷污层评分均较低,%ODT均较高(P<0.05)。CWA 组的玷污层评分最低,%ODT最高,与其他所有组均有显著差异(P<0.05)。SA 组的玷污层评分显著高于 FF 或 UAI 组,%ODT 显著低于 FF 或 UAI 组(P<0.05)。与其他冲洗策略相比,CWA 在根管的中三分之一和根尖三分之一处具有更好的去除玷污层效果。

相似文献

1
Effectiveness of irrigation strategies on the removal of the smear layer from root canal dentin.冲洗策略对去除根管牙本质玷污层的效果。
Odontology. 2019 Apr;107(2):142-149. doi: 10.1007/s10266-018-0373-2. Epub 2018 Jun 28.
2
[In vitro evaluation of the effectiveness of XP-endo Finisher file on smear layer removal after root canal instrumentation].[XP-endo Finisher锉在根管预备后对玷污层去除效果的体外评价]
Hua Xi Kou Qiang Yi Xue Za Zhi. 2019 Feb 1;37(1):48-52. doi: 10.7518/hxkq.2019.01.009.
3
Effectiveness of ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA) and MTAD on debris and smear layer removal using a self-adjusting file.使用自调式锉时乙二胺四乙酸(EDTA)和MTAD去除碎屑及玷污层的效果
Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2011 Dec;112(6):803-8. doi: 10.1016/j.tripleo.2011.05.038. Epub 2011 Aug 27.
4
Effectiveness of different final irrigant activation protocols on smear layer removal in curved canals.不同终末冲洗液激活方案对弯曲根管内玷污层去除效果的影响。
J Endod. 2010 Aug;36(8):1361-6. doi: 10.1016/j.joen.2010.03.037. Epub 2010 May 13.
5
Canal cleanliness using different irrigation activation systems: a SEM evaluation.不同冲洗激活系统对根管清洁效果的 SEM 评估
Clin Oral Investig. 2017 Dec;21(9):2681-2687. doi: 10.1007/s00784-017-2070-x. Epub 2017 Feb 9.
6
The self-adjusting file (SAF). Part 3: removal of debris and smear layer-A scanning electron microscope study.自调整锉(SAF)。第 3 部分:去除碎屑和玷污层——扫描电镜研究。
J Endod. 2010 Apr;36(4):697-702. doi: 10.1016/j.joen.2009.12.037.
7
Smear layer removal and canal cleanliness using different irrigation systems (EndoActivator, EndoVac, and passive ultrasonic irrigation): field emission scanning electron microscopic evaluation in an in vitro study.使用不同冲洗系统(EndoActivator、EndoVac和被动超声冲洗)去除玷污层和清洁根管:一项体外研究的场发射扫描电子显微镜评估
J Endod. 2013 Nov;39(11):1456-60. doi: 10.1016/j.joen.2013.07.028. Epub 2013 Sep 6.
8
Effectiveness of oxidative potential water as a root canal irrigant.氧化电位水作为根管冲洗剂的有效性。
Int Endod J. 2001 Jun;34(4):308-17. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2591.2001.00395.x.
9
Effectiveness of different activated irrigation techniques on debris and smear layer removal from curved root canals: a SEM evaluation.不同活化冲洗技术对弯曲根管内碎屑和玷污层清除效果的扫描电镜评价
Aust Endod J. 2020 Apr;46(1):40-46. doi: 10.1111/aej.12342. Epub 2019 Mar 25.
10
Evaluation of radicular dentin erosion and smear layer removal capacity of Self-Adjusting File using different concentrations of sodium hypochlorite as an initial irrigant.使用不同浓度次氯酸钠作为初始冲洗液时,对自调式锉的根管牙本质侵蚀和玷污层去除能力的评估。
Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2011 Oct;112(4):524-30. doi: 10.1016/j.tripleo.2011.02.039. Epub 2011 Jun 12.

引用本文的文献

1
Comparisons of the smear layer removal efficacy of dual-action irrigants and different activation techniques.双效冲洗剂与不同激活技术去除玷污层效果的比较。
J Dent Sci. 2025 Apr;20(2):877-884. doi: 10.1016/j.jds.2024.09.003. Epub 2024 Sep 20.
2
Comparison of Easydo Activator, ultrasonic and needle irrigation techniques on sealer penetration and smear layer removal in vitro.比较 Easydo 激活器、超声和针头冲洗技术对体外封闭剂渗透和玷污层去除的效果。
BMC Oral Health. 2024 Jan 9;24(1):56. doi: 10.1186/s12903-023-03833-y.
3
The effects of laser and ultrasonic irrigation activation methods on smear and debris removal in traditional and conservative endodontic access cavities.

本文引用的文献

1
Histologic Assessment of Debridement of the Root Canal Isthmus of Mandibular Molars by Irrigant Activation Techniques Ex Vivo.下颌磨牙根管峡部清创的冲洗液激活技术体外组织学评估
J Endod. 2016 Aug;42(8):1268-72. doi: 10.1016/j.joen.2016.05.005. Epub 2016 Jun 20.
2
Does Smear Layer Removal Influence Root Canal Therapy Outcome? A Systematic Review.去除玷污层会影响根管治疗效果吗?一项系统评价。
J Clin Pediatr Dent. 2016 Winter;40(1):1-7. doi: 10.17796/1053-4628-40.1.1.
3
Effect of Ultrasonic Activation of Irrigants on Smear Layer Removal.
激光和超声冲洗激活方法对传统和保守牙髓腔入口中玷污层和碎屑去除的效果。
Lasers Med Sci. 2023 Jun 26;38(1):148. doi: 10.1007/s10103-023-03816-z.
4
Cleaning efficacy of EDDY versus ultrasonically-activated irrigation in root canals: a systematic review and meta-analysis.EDDY 与超声激活冲洗在根管清洁效果方面的比较:系统评价和荟萃分析。
BMC Oral Health. 2023 Mar 17;23(1):155. doi: 10.1186/s12903-023-02875-6.
5
Evaluation of pH and calcium ions release of two tricalcium silicate-based sealers through roots of primary teeth.通过乳牙牙根对两种硅酸三钙基封闭剂的pH值和钙离子释放情况进行评估。
J Conserv Dent. 2023 Jan-Feb;26(1):42-46. doi: 10.4103/jcd.jcd_355_21. Epub 2022 Aug 17.
6
Effect of photon-induced photoacoustic streaming and shock-wave enhanced emission photoacoustic streaming technique on the removal of the smear layer after root canal preparation in curved root canals.光子诱导光声流和冲击波增强发射光声流技术对弯曲根管根管预备后玷污层去除的影响。
J Dent Sci. 2023 Jan;18(1):157-164. doi: 10.1016/j.jds.2022.06.019. Epub 2022 Jul 8.
7
Intratubular penetration capacity of HiFlow bioceramic sealer used with warm obturation techniques and single cone: A confocal laser scanning microscopic study.采用热牙胶充填技术和单尖法时HiFlow生物陶瓷封闭剂的根管内渗透能力:一项共聚焦激光扫描显微镜研究
Heliyon. 2022 Aug 27;8(9):e10388. doi: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2022.e10388. eCollection 2022 Sep.
8
Intratubular penetration ability in the canal perimeter using HiFlow bioceramic sealer with warm obturation techniques and single cone.使用HiFlow生物陶瓷封闭剂结合热牙胶垂直加压技术和单尖法时,根管壁内的渗透能力。
J Clin Exp Dent. 2022 Aug 1;14(8):e639-e645. doi: 10.4317/jced.59815. eCollection 2022 Aug.
9
Comparison of the Efficacy of CanalBrush, EndoActivator, and Passive Ultrasonic Irrigation on the Removal of Triple Antibiotic Paste from Root Canal Walls: An Study.根管刷、EndoActivator与被动超声冲洗在去除根管壁三联抗生素糊剂效果的比较:一项研究。
J Int Soc Prev Community Dent. 2020 Aug 6;10(4):424-430. doi: 10.4103/jispcd.JISPCD_13_20. eCollection 2020 Jul-Aug.
超声激活冲洗液对玷污层去除的影响。
J Endod. 2015 Aug;41(8):1359-63. doi: 10.1016/j.joen.2015.03.023. Epub 2015 May 8.
4
Effectiveness of various irrigation activation protocols and the self-adjusting file system on smear layer and debris removal.各种冲洗激活方案和自调式锉系统在去除玷污层和碎屑方面的有效性。
Scanning. 2014 Nov-Dec;36(6):640-7. doi: 10.1002/sca.21171. Epub 2014 Oct 6.
5
Irrigation in endodontics.牙髓病学中的冲洗
Br Dent J. 2014 Mar;216(6):299-303. doi: 10.1038/sj.bdj.2014.204.
6
Smear layer removal and canal cleanliness using different irrigation systems (EndoActivator, EndoVac, and passive ultrasonic irrigation): field emission scanning electron microscopic evaluation in an in vitro study.使用不同冲洗系统(EndoActivator、EndoVac和被动超声冲洗)去除玷污层和清洁根管:一项体外研究的场发射扫描电子显微镜评估
J Endod. 2013 Nov;39(11):1456-60. doi: 10.1016/j.joen.2013.07.028. Epub 2013 Sep 6.
7
Effect of smear layer against disinfection protocols on Enterococcus faecalis-infected dentin.玷污层对粪肠球菌感染牙本质消毒方案的影响。
J Endod. 2013 Nov;39(11):1395-400. doi: 10.1016/j.joen.2013.05.007. Epub 2013 Aug 31.
8
Irrigant flow beyond the insertion depth of an ultrasonically oscillating file in straight and curved root canals: visualization and cleaning efficacy.超声震荡器械在直弯根管内超出工作长度时的冲洗液流:可视化与清洁效果。
J Endod. 2012 May;38(5):657-61. doi: 10.1016/j.joen.2012.02.001. Epub 2012 Mar 3.
9
Comparison of the effect of four decalcifying agents combined with 60°C 3% sodium hypochlorite on smear layer removal.比较四种脱钙剂联合 60°C 3%次氯酸钠对清除玷污层效果的影响。
J Endod. 2012 Mar;38(3):381-4. doi: 10.1016/j.joen.2011.11.013. Epub 2011 Dec 22.
10
Review of ultrasonic irrigation in endodontics: increasing action of irrigating solutions.超声冲洗在根管治疗中的应用评价:提高冲洗液的作用。
Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal. 2012 May 1;17(3):e512-6. doi: 10.4317/medoral.17621.