Smear layer removal efficacy of irrigating solutions applied distinct needle designs: a scanning electron microscopy study
1Department of Pediatric Dentistry, Faculty of Dentistry, Ankara University, 06560, Ankara, Turkey
2Department of Pediatric Dentistry, Faculty of Dentistry, Uşak University, 64000, Uşak, Turkey
Submitted: 08 September 2022 Accepted: 20 October 2022
Online publish date: 10 November 2022
This research aimed to assess the efficacy of different irrigants applied with different types of needle tips on smear layer removal (SLR) in primary incisors. This study was carried out with 35 freshly extracted upper primary incisors. The samples were randomly distributed to five study groups (n = 7) (1 to 4: experimental, 5: control). These included Group 1: 5% Ethylenediaminetetraacetic Acid (EDTA) + 1% Sodium Hypochlorite (NaOCl) applied with open-ended needle (OEN), Group 2: 6% Citric Acid (CA) + 1%NaOCl applied with OEN, Group 3: 5% EDTA + 1% NaOCl applied with double side-vented needle (DSVN), Group 4: 6% CA + 1% NaOCl applied with DSVN and Group 5: 1% NaOCl applied with OEN. Accordingly, the inner root surfaces were examined using scanning electron microscopy (SEM). The differences between the groups were analyzed using Kruskal-Wallis, Friedman and Siegel-Castellan tests (p < 0.05). In the coronal third, all the experimental groups (groups 1, 2, 3 and 4) were superior to the control group (p = 0.002, p = 0.002, p < 0.001 and p < 0.001, respectively). Groups 2, 3 and 4 showed superior SLR to the control group (p = 0.024, p = 0.001 and p = 0.004, respectively) in the middle third. DSVN groups of EDTA and CA showed superior SLR efficacy than the control (p < 0.001 and p = 0.002, respectively) in the apical third. The SLR efficacy was higher in the coronal third compared to the apical third in the experimental groups (groups 1, 2, 3 and 4) (p = 0.015, p = 0.048, p = 0.048 and p = 0.048, respectively). In addition, 3 samples of EDTA showed erosion (2 in the coronal with OEN, 1 in the middle with DSVN). It was possible to conclude that the SLR efficacy of DSVNs and OENs was similar. CA could be recommended since it did not cause erosive damage compared to EDTA in primary incisors.
Citric acid; EDTA; Irrigation; Primary teeth; Pulpectomy; Side-vented needle
Akif Demirel,Nur Sena Önder,Merve Alkış,Şaziye Sarı. Smear layer removal efficacy of irrigating solutions applied distinct needle designs: a scanning electron microscopy study. Journal of Clinical Pediatric Dentistry. 2022.doi:10.22514/jocpd.2022.016.
 Gupta S, Kenchappa M, Gupta P, Chaurasiya S, Sharma P, Satyarth S. Smear layer removal in primary teeth using a novel irrigant, QMix: an in vitro study. Journal of Cranio-Maxillary Diseases. 2015; 4: 137-143.
 Buldur B, Kapdan A. Comparison of the EndoVac system and conventional needle irrigation on removal of the smear layer in primary molar root canals. Nigerian Journal of Clinical Practice. 2017; 20: 1168-1174.
 Demirel A, Yüksel BN, Ziya M, Gümüş H, Doğan S, Sari Ş. The effect of different irrigation protocols on smear layer removal in root canals of primary teeth: a SEM study. Acta Odontologica Scandinavica. 2019; 77: 380–385.
 Toyota Y, Yoshihara T, Hisada A, Yawaka Y. Removal of smear layer by various root canal irrigations in primary teeth. Pediatric Dental Journal. 2017; 27: 8–13.
 Mali S, Singla S, Tyagi P, Sharma A, Talreja N, Gautam A. Comparative evaluation of the efficacy of different herbal irrigants on the removal of smear layer of primary teeth: a scanning electron microscopy study. Journal of the Indian Society of Pedodontics and Preventive Dentistry. 2020; 38: 374–380.
 Barcelos R, Tannure PN, Gleıser R, Luız RR, Prımo LG. The influence of smear layer removal on primary tooth pulpectomy outcome: a 24-month, double-blind, randomized, and controlled clinical trial evaluation. International Journal of Paediatric Dentistry. 2012; 22: 369–381.
 Ximenes M, Triches TC, Beltrame AP, Hilgert LA, Cardoso M. Effect of endodontic irrigation with 1% sodium hypochlorite and 17% EDTA on primary teeth: a scanning electron microscope analysis. General Dentistry. 2013; 61: 24–27.
 Kaur R, Singh R, Sethi K, Garg S, Miglani S, Vats S. Irrigating solutions in pediatric dentistry: literature review and update. Journal of Advanced Medical and Dental Sciences Research. 2014; 2: 104–115.
 Hariharan V, Nandlal B, Srilatha K. Efficacy of various root canal irrigants on removal of smear layer in the primary root canals after hand instrumentation: a scanning electron microscopy study. Journal of Indian Society of Pedodontics and Preventive Dentistry. 2010; 28: 271-277.
 Pitoni CM, Figueiredo MC, Araújo FB, Souza MA. Ethylenediaminete-traacetic acid and citric acid solutions for smear layer removal in primary tooth root canals. Journal of Dentistry for Children. 2011; 78: 131–137.
 Tannure PN, Azevedo CP, Barcelos R, Gleiser R, Primo LG. Long-term outcomes of primary tooth pulpectomy with and without smear layer removal: a randomized split-mouth clinical trial. Pediatric Dentistry. 2011; 33: 316–20.
 Fumes AC, Sousa-Neto MD, Leoni GB, Versiani MA, da Silva LAB, da Silva RAB, et al. Root canal morphology of primary molars: a micro-computed tomography study. European Archives of Paediatric Dentistry. 2014; 15: 317–326.
 Ozcan G, Sekerci AE, Cantekin K, Aydinbelge M, Dogan S. Evaluation of root canal morphology of human primary molars by using CBCT and comprehensive review of the literature. Acta Odontologica Scandinavica. 2016; 74: 250–258.
 Demirel A. The smear layer removal efficiency of different concentrations of EDTA in primary teeth: a SEM study. Cumhuriyet Dental Journal. 2021; 24: 57–65.
 Provoost C, Rocca GT, Thibault A, Machtou P, Bouilllaguet S. Influence of needle design and irrigant flow rate on the removal of enterococcus faecalis biofilms in vitro. Dentistry Journal. 2022; 10: 59.
 Boutsioukis C, Verhaagen B, Versluis M, Kastrinakis E, Wesselink PR, van der Sluis LWM. Evaluation of irrigant flow in the root canal using different needle types by an unsteady computational fluid dynamics model. Journal of Endodontics. 2010; 36: 875–879.
 Silva PB, Krolow AM, Pilownic KJ, Casarin RP, Lima RKP, Leonardo RDT, et al. Apical extrusion of debris and irrigants using different ırrigation needles. Brazilian Dental Journal. 2016; 27: 192–195.
 Zehnder M. Root Canal Irrigants. Journal of Endodontics. 2006; 32: 389–398.
 Wu MK, van der Sluis LWM, Wesselink PR. The capability of two hand instrumentation techniques to remove the inner layer of dentine in oval canals. International Endodontic Journal. 2003; 36: 218–224.
 Shen Y, Gao Y, Qian W, Ruse ND, Zhou X, Wu H, et al. Three-dimensional numeric simulation of root canal irrigant flow with different ırrigation needles. Journal of Endodontics. 2010; 36: 884–889.
 Dadresanfar B, Khalilak Z, Delvarani A, Mehrvarzfar P, Vatanpour M, Pourassadollah M. Effect of ultrasonication with EDTA or MTAD on smear layer, debris and erosion scores. Journal of Oral Science. 2011; 53: 31–36.
 Katge F, Wakpanjar M. Root canal morphology of primary molars by clearing technique: an in vitro study. Journal of Indian Society of Pedodontics and Preventive Dentistry. 2018; 36: 151-157.
 Vallabhaneni K, Kakarla P, Avula SSJ, Reddy NVG, Gowd MP, Vardhan KR. Comparative analyses of smear layer removal using four different irrigant solutions in the primary root canals—a scanning electron microscopic study. Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research. 2017; 11: ZC64–ZC67.
 Ferreira NS, Camargo CH, Palo RM, Martinho FC, Gomes AP. Comparison of the effectiveness of 3 irrigation devices for the cleaning of root canal walls instrumented with oscillatory and rotary techniques. General Dentistry. 2015; 63: 71–74.
 Guerreiro-Tanomaru JM, Loiola LE, Morgental RD, Leonardo RDT, Tanomaru-Filho M. Efficacy of four irrigation needles in cleaning the apical third of root canals. Brazilian Dental Journal. 2013; 24: 21–24.
 Boutsioukis C, Lambrianidis T, Verhaagen B, Versluis M, Kastrinakis E, Wesselink PR, et al. The effect of needle-insertion depth on the irrigant flow in the root canal: evaluation using an unsteady computational fluid dynamics model. Journal of Endodontics. 2010; 36: 1664–1668.
 Özer S, Tunç E Ş, Kalyoncuoğlu E, Gülcan B. Evaluation of different root canal filling methods in primary teeth. Meandros Medical and Dental Journal. 2018; 19: 132–137.
Science Citation Index Expanded (SciSearch) Created as SCI in 1964, Science Citation Index Expanded now indexes over 9,500 of the world’s most impactful journals across 178 scientific disciplines. More than 53 million records and 1.18 billion cited references date back from 1900 to present.
Biological Abstracts Easily discover critical journal coverage of the life sciences with Biological Abstracts, produced by the Web of Science Group, with topics ranging from botany to microbiology to pharmacology. Including BIOSIS indexing and MeSH terms, specialized indexing in Biological Abstracts helps you to discover more accurate, context-sensitive results.
Google Scholar Google Scholar is a freely accessible web search engine that indexes the full text or metadata of scholarly literature across an array of publishing formats and disciplines.
JournalSeek Genamics JournalSeek is the largest completely categorized database of freely available journal information available on the internet. The database presently contains 39226 titles. Journal information includes the description (aims and scope), journal abbreviation, journal homepage link, subject category and ISSN.
Current Contents - Clinical Medicine Current Contents - Clinical Medicine provides easy access to complete tables of contents, abstracts, bibliographic information and all other significant items in recently published issues from over 1,000 leading journals in clinical medicine.
BIOSIS Previews BIOSIS Previews is an English-language, bibliographic database service, with abstracts and citation indexing. It is part of Clarivate Analytics Web of Science suite. BIOSIS Previews indexes data from 1926 to the present.
Journal Citation Reports/Science Edition Journal Citation Reports/Science Edition aims to evaluate a journal’s value from multiple perspectives including the journal impact factor, descriptive data about a journal’s open access content as well as contributing authors, and provide readers a transparent and publisher-neutral data & statistics information about the journal.