z-logo
open-access-imgOpen Access
A comparative investigation of the cleaning efficacy of different manual and mechanical endodontic instruments (SEM study)
Author(s) -
Dragoslav Dacic,
Slavoljub Živković
Publication year - 2003
Publication title -
stomatološki glasnik srbije
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
eISSN - 1452-3701
pISSN - 0039-1743
DOI - 10.2298/sgs0303137d
Subject(s) - smear layer , dentistry , instrumentation (computer programming) , root canal , dental instruments , debris , nickel titanium , materials science , orthodontics , medicine , computer science , geology , composite material , oceanography , shape memory alloy , operating system
The purpose of this SEM study was to evaluate the cleaning effects of different manual and mechanical endodontic instruments. Sixty single canal human teeth were selected for this study. The root canals were instrumented by seven types of manual endodontic instruments (K-enlargers, K files Rattail files, K-Flexofiles, K Flex files, Hedstrom and NiTi Flex files) and five different mechanical endodontic instruments (Rispi, Rat tail Hedstrom, NiTi Flex files and K-enlargers). During and after the instrumentation, the canals were irrigated by 2.5% sodium hypochlorit. After splitting the roots longitudinally, the amount of debris and smear layer was quantified on the basis of a numerical evaluation scale, using scanning electron microscope. Results were statistically analysed using the Kruskal-Wallis test and t-test. There were no statistically significant differences between hand instrumentation and machine instrumentation with different endodontic instruments for any of the variables tested. Best instrumentation results in removing the smear layer and dentinal debris from the root canal were obtained with Kerr, NiTi and Hedstrom hand files and with K-enlargers, NiTi and Rat-tail mechanical files. In the apical thirds of root canals prepared using hand and mechanical endodontic instruments the smear layer and dentinal debris were always more abundant when compared with the middle and coronal thirds. In conslusion, cleaning efficacy differed slightly among the techniques and instruments, none of them completely removed smear layer and all left some debris

The content you want is available to Zendy users.

Already have an account? Click here to sign in.
Having issues? You can contact us here