We have located links that may give you full text access.
A Comparative Evaluation of Intraradicular Smear Removal Efficacy of 2% Chitosan (Low Molecular Weight), 4% Chitosan Citrate, and 10% Citric Acid when Used as Final Rinse in Irrigation Protocols: A Field Emission Scanning Electron Microscopic Study.
Journal of Pharmacy & Bioallied Sciences 2017 November
Aim: This study aims to compare the smear layer removal efficacy of 2% chitosan (low molecular weight) (C-LMV), 4% chitosan citrate (CC), and 10% citric acid (CA) when used in specific irrigant protocols.
Materials and Methods: A total of 60 single-rooted maxillary incisors and canines were decoronated, standardized to a root length of 15 mm, and prepared with rotary files up to protaper F3 size. Sodium hypochlorite was used as initial rinse [8 ml]. The samples were divided into experimental (Group III, IV, V, and VI) ( n = 10) and control groups (I - 17% EDTA, II - normal saline) ( n = 5) based on the type of final rinse solution (5 ml) used, that is, 2% C-LMV, 4% C-citrate, 10% CA, and 1% acetic acid. Samples were dehydrated, split buccolingually, gold sputter coated, and examined in field emission scanning electron microscope.
Results: Overall, the Group IV, V, and III presented the least amounts of smear, debris, and erosion among the experimental groups at the apical, middle, and coronal one-thirds of the root canal with a mean value of 1.53 ± 0.42, 1.33 ± 0.42, and 1.60 ± 0.46, respectively, and there was no statistically significant difference ( P > 0.05).
Conclusion: The use of CC as final rinse solution during biomechanical preparation seems promising.
Materials and Methods: A total of 60 single-rooted maxillary incisors and canines were decoronated, standardized to a root length of 15 mm, and prepared with rotary files up to protaper F3 size. Sodium hypochlorite was used as initial rinse [8 ml]. The samples were divided into experimental (Group III, IV, V, and VI) ( n = 10) and control groups (I - 17% EDTA, II - normal saline) ( n = 5) based on the type of final rinse solution (5 ml) used, that is, 2% C-LMV, 4% C-citrate, 10% CA, and 1% acetic acid. Samples were dehydrated, split buccolingually, gold sputter coated, and examined in field emission scanning electron microscope.
Results: Overall, the Group IV, V, and III presented the least amounts of smear, debris, and erosion among the experimental groups at the apical, middle, and coronal one-thirds of the root canal with a mean value of 1.53 ± 0.42, 1.33 ± 0.42, and 1.60 ± 0.46, respectively, and there was no statistically significant difference ( P > 0.05).
Conclusion: The use of CC as final rinse solution during biomechanical preparation seems promising.
Full text links
Related Resources
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app