Journal of Conservative Dentistry
Home About us Editorial Board Instructions Submission Subscribe Advertise Contact e-Alerts Login 
Users Online: 1574
Print this page  Email this page Bookmark this page Small font sizeDefault font sizeIncrease font size
ORIGINAL RESEARCH ARTICLE
Year : 2018  |  Volume : 21  |  Issue : 4  |  Page : 419-423

Comparative analysis of smear layer removal by conventional endodontic irrigants with a newly experimented irrigant-fumaric acid: A scanning electron microscopic study


1 Department of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, Career Postgraduate Institute of Dental Sciences and Hospital, Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh, India
2 Department of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, HKES S. Nijalingappa Institute of Dental Sciences, Gulbarga, Karnataka, India

Correspondence Address:
Dr. Sanjay Jaiswal
Department of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, Career Postgraduate Institute of Dental Sciences and Hospital, Iim Road, Ghaila, Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh
India
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/JCD.JCD_290_16

Rights and Permissions

Introduction: This study was aimed to evaluate the efficacy of 17% ethylenediaminetetraacetate (EDTA), 7% maleic acid and 0.7% fumaric acid in smear layer removal from the root canal walls. Materials and Methods: Forty single-rooted mandibular premolars were collected and prepared till F3 rotary ProTaper file with 1 ml of 3% of sodium hypochlorite after each instrument change. Samples were randomly divided into 4 groups according to the final irrigating solution: 17% EDTA, 7% maleic acid, 0.7% fumaric acid, and 0.9% saline. The samples were prepared for scanning electron microscope analysis to observe smear layer removal at coronal, middle, and apical third level of root canal system. Results: At coronal third level, fumaric acid was equally efficient in smear layer removal when compared to maleic acid and EDTA without any significant difference between them. At the middle third, fumaric acid showed significantly better results than maleic acid followed by EDTA. At the apical third, both fumaric acid and maleic acid were equally effective without any significant difference between them but both showed significantly better results than EDTA. Conclusion: Fumaric acid can be tried as a new irrigating agent for smear layer removal in root canal system.


[FULL TEXT] [PDF]*
Print this article     Email this article
 Next article
 Previous article
 Table of Contents

 Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
 Citation Manager
 Access Statistics
 Reader Comments
 Email Alert *
 Add to My List *
 * Requires registration (Free)
 

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed648    
    Printed12    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded197    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal