Evaluation of SmearOFF, maleic acid and two EDTA preparations in smear layer removal from root canal dentin

Nidambur Vasudev Ballal, Himanshu Jain, Sheetal Rao, Alexander D. Johnson, John Baeten, James F. Wolcott

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Objectives: To evaluate SmearOFF, 7% maleic acid (MA) and two different preparations of ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA) in smear layer removal. Materials and methods: Fifty single-rooted teeth were separated into five groups, instrumented and irrigated as follows: (1) SmearOFF, (2) 7% MA, (3) 18% EDTA (pH 11.4), (4) 17% EDTA (pH 8.5) and (5) 0.9% saline. Teeth samples were blinded and examined by scanning electron microscopy with Image J software. Results: Eighteen percent EDTA was less efficient when compared to SmearOFF and MA at all thirds of the root canal system. There was no difference between SmearOFF and MA in the coronal and middle thirds. In the apical third, MA removed more smear layer. Seventeen percent EDTA was as efficient as SmearOFF and MA in coronal and middle third but not in the apical third. Eighteen percent EDTA removed smear layer less efficiently in the coronal and middle thirds than 17% EDTA; in the apical third, there was no difference observed. In the saline group, all specimens were heavily smeared. There was no significant difference between 18% EDTA and saline at all canal thirds. Conclusions: SmearOFF and 17% EDTA (pH 8.5) had better smear layer removal capability in the coronal and middle thirds of the root canal system. In the apical third, 7% MA was superior. 18% EDTA (pH 11.4) and saline had poor smear layer removal ability.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)28-32
Number of pages5
JournalActa Odontologica Scandinavica
Volume77
Issue number1
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 02-01-2019

Fingerprint

Smear Layer
Dental Pulp Cavity
Dentin
Edetic Acid
Tooth
maleic acid
Electron Scanning Microscopy
Software

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Dentistry(all)

Cite this

Ballal, Nidambur Vasudev ; Jain, Himanshu ; Rao, Sheetal ; Johnson, Alexander D. ; Baeten, John ; Wolcott, James F. / Evaluation of SmearOFF, maleic acid and two EDTA preparations in smear layer removal from root canal dentin. In: Acta Odontologica Scandinavica. 2019 ; Vol. 77, No. 1. pp. 28-32.
@article{b3da2747c611416688ffbad8a5e95f54,
title = "Evaluation of SmearOFF, maleic acid and two EDTA preparations in smear layer removal from root canal dentin",
abstract = "Objectives: To evaluate SmearOFF, 7{\%} maleic acid (MA) and two different preparations of ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA) in smear layer removal. Materials and methods: Fifty single-rooted teeth were separated into five groups, instrumented and irrigated as follows: (1) SmearOFF, (2) 7{\%} MA, (3) 18{\%} EDTA (pH 11.4), (4) 17{\%} EDTA (pH 8.5) and (5) 0.9{\%} saline. Teeth samples were blinded and examined by scanning electron microscopy with Image J software. Results: Eighteen percent EDTA was less efficient when compared to SmearOFF and MA at all thirds of the root canal system. There was no difference between SmearOFF and MA in the coronal and middle thirds. In the apical third, MA removed more smear layer. Seventeen percent EDTA was as efficient as SmearOFF and MA in coronal and middle third but not in the apical third. Eighteen percent EDTA removed smear layer less efficiently in the coronal and middle thirds than 17{\%} EDTA; in the apical third, there was no difference observed. In the saline group, all specimens were heavily smeared. There was no significant difference between 18{\%} EDTA and saline at all canal thirds. Conclusions: SmearOFF and 17{\%} EDTA (pH 8.5) had better smear layer removal capability in the coronal and middle thirds of the root canal system. In the apical third, 7{\%} MA was superior. 18{\%} EDTA (pH 11.4) and saline had poor smear layer removal ability.",
author = "Ballal, {Nidambur Vasudev} and Himanshu Jain and Sheetal Rao and Johnson, {Alexander D.} and John Baeten and Wolcott, {James F.}",
year = "2019",
month = "1",
day = "2",
doi = "10.1080/00016357.2018.1495842",
language = "English",
volume = "77",
pages = "28--32",
journal = "Acta Odontologica Scandinavica",
issn = "0001-6357",
publisher = "Informa Healthcare",
number = "1",

}

Evaluation of SmearOFF, maleic acid and two EDTA preparations in smear layer removal from root canal dentin. / Ballal, Nidambur Vasudev; Jain, Himanshu; Rao, Sheetal; Johnson, Alexander D.; Baeten, John; Wolcott, James F.

In: Acta Odontologica Scandinavica, Vol. 77, No. 1, 02.01.2019, p. 28-32.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Evaluation of SmearOFF, maleic acid and two EDTA preparations in smear layer removal from root canal dentin

AU - Ballal, Nidambur Vasudev

AU - Jain, Himanshu

AU - Rao, Sheetal

AU - Johnson, Alexander D.

AU - Baeten, John

AU - Wolcott, James F.

PY - 2019/1/2

Y1 - 2019/1/2

N2 - Objectives: To evaluate SmearOFF, 7% maleic acid (MA) and two different preparations of ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA) in smear layer removal. Materials and methods: Fifty single-rooted teeth were separated into five groups, instrumented and irrigated as follows: (1) SmearOFF, (2) 7% MA, (3) 18% EDTA (pH 11.4), (4) 17% EDTA (pH 8.5) and (5) 0.9% saline. Teeth samples were blinded and examined by scanning electron microscopy with Image J software. Results: Eighteen percent EDTA was less efficient when compared to SmearOFF and MA at all thirds of the root canal system. There was no difference between SmearOFF and MA in the coronal and middle thirds. In the apical third, MA removed more smear layer. Seventeen percent EDTA was as efficient as SmearOFF and MA in coronal and middle third but not in the apical third. Eighteen percent EDTA removed smear layer less efficiently in the coronal and middle thirds than 17% EDTA; in the apical third, there was no difference observed. In the saline group, all specimens were heavily smeared. There was no significant difference between 18% EDTA and saline at all canal thirds. Conclusions: SmearOFF and 17% EDTA (pH 8.5) had better smear layer removal capability in the coronal and middle thirds of the root canal system. In the apical third, 7% MA was superior. 18% EDTA (pH 11.4) and saline had poor smear layer removal ability.

AB - Objectives: To evaluate SmearOFF, 7% maleic acid (MA) and two different preparations of ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA) in smear layer removal. Materials and methods: Fifty single-rooted teeth were separated into five groups, instrumented and irrigated as follows: (1) SmearOFF, (2) 7% MA, (3) 18% EDTA (pH 11.4), (4) 17% EDTA (pH 8.5) and (5) 0.9% saline. Teeth samples were blinded and examined by scanning electron microscopy with Image J software. Results: Eighteen percent EDTA was less efficient when compared to SmearOFF and MA at all thirds of the root canal system. There was no difference between SmearOFF and MA in the coronal and middle thirds. In the apical third, MA removed more smear layer. Seventeen percent EDTA was as efficient as SmearOFF and MA in coronal and middle third but not in the apical third. Eighteen percent EDTA removed smear layer less efficiently in the coronal and middle thirds than 17% EDTA; in the apical third, there was no difference observed. In the saline group, all specimens were heavily smeared. There was no significant difference between 18% EDTA and saline at all canal thirds. Conclusions: SmearOFF and 17% EDTA (pH 8.5) had better smear layer removal capability in the coronal and middle thirds of the root canal system. In the apical third, 7% MA was superior. 18% EDTA (pH 11.4) and saline had poor smear layer removal ability.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85056090833&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85056090833&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1080/00016357.2018.1495842

DO - 10.1080/00016357.2018.1495842

M3 - Article

VL - 77

SP - 28

EP - 32

JO - Acta Odontologica Scandinavica

JF - Acta Odontologica Scandinavica

SN - 0001-6357

IS - 1

ER -