背景:在这项研究中,我们旨在比较各种螯合剂的有效性,乙二胺四乙酸(EDTA),柠檬酸(CA),和依替膦酸(HEDP)以两种不同的形式混合,去除涂抹层并促进牙髓封闭剂渗透到拔出的单根牙齿的牙本质小管中。
方法:该研究使用75颗牙齿,分为五组:17%EDTA,10%CA,9%HEDP+NaOCl,9%HEDP+蒸馏水(DW),和对照(DW)组。扫描电子显微镜用于评估涂抹层的去除,共聚焦激光显微镜用于评估从根尖不同深度的管状密封剂渗透。
结果:与其他试剂相比,使用17%EDTA和10%CA的密封剂渗透率最高(p<0.001)。在子宫颈第三,EDTA的密封剂渗透,HEDP+NaOCl,HEDP+DW组与DW组相比差异有统计学意义(p=0.020)。对于中间的三分之一,EDTA,CA,HEDP+NaOCl组明显高于DW组(p<0.001)。HEDP+NaOCl的宫颈水平值显著高于根尖水平值,HEDP+DW,和DW(p<0.001)。在所有深度处,9%HEDP+DW的涂抹层去除低于17%EDTA和10%CA的涂抹层去除(p<0.001)。在10%CA和对照(p=0.015)之间,在中等深度观察到涂抹层去除显着。
结论:在本研究的局限性内,就密封剂渗透和涂抹层去除而言,EDTA和CA的值最高。根据这些发现,与双重冲洗或单一HEDP冲洗相比,使用强螯合剂突出了更好的临床效率。
BACKGROUND: In this study, we aimed to compare the effectiveness of various chelating agents, ethilenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA), citric acid (CA), and etidronic acid (HEDP) mixed in two different forms, in removing the smear layer and promoting the penetration of an endodontic sealer into the dentinal tubules of extracted single-rooted teeth.
METHODS: The study used 75 teeth divided into five groups: 17% EDTA, 10% CA, 9% HEDP + NaOCl, 9% HEDP + distilled water (DW), and a control (DW) group. Scanning electron microscopy was used to assess smear layer removal and confocal laser microscopy was used to evaluate tubular sealer penetration at different depths from the apical tip.
RESULTS: Sealer penetration was highest with 17% EDTA and 10% CA as compared with the other agents (p<0.001). At the cervical third, the sealer penetration for EDTA, HEDP + NaOCl, and HEDP + DW groups were significantly different than those in DW (p = 0.020). For the middle third, EDTA, CA, and HEDP + NaOCl groups were significantly higher than those of the DW group (p<0.001). Cervical-level values were significantly higher than apical-level values for HEDP + NaOCl, HEDP + DW, and DW (p<0.001). Smear layer removal was lower with 9% HEDP + DW than with 17% EDTA and 10% CA at all depths (p<0.001). A significancy in smear layer removal was observed between 10% CA and control (p = 0.015) in middle depth.
CONCLUSIONS: Within the limitations of this study, highest values were seen in EDTA and CA in terms of sealer penetration and smear layer removal. In the light of these findings, the use of strong chelating agents highlights better clinical efficiency than dual-rinse or single HEDP irrigation.