利用扫描电子显微镜分析声波辅助根管荡洗作用时间对玷污层清理效果的影响

doi:10.13591/j.cnki.kqyx.2023.01.008

口腔医学 ›› 2023, Vol. 43 ›› Issue (1): 46-51.doi: 10.13591/j.cnki.kqyx.2023.01.008

利用扫描电子显微镜分析声波辅助根管荡洗作用时间对玷污层清理效果的影响

肖敏¹,刘瑾²,范晓敏¹,吴昊泽¹,王珏钰¹,王可境¹,李娜¹,蒋文凯¹(),梅笑寒¹()

1 军事口腔医学国家重点实验室,国家口腔疾病临床医学研究中心,陕西省口腔医学重点实验室,第四军医大学口腔医学院牙体牙髓病科,陕西西安(710032)
2 黄山市人民医院口腔科,安徽黄山(245000)

修回日期:2022-09-15 出版日期:2023-01-28 发布日期:2023-01-11
通讯作者: 梅笑寒 Tel:(029)84772614, E-mail:10472915@qq.com;蒋文凯 Tel:(029)84772614, E-mail:19518923@qq.com.
基金资助:
国家自然科学基金面上项目(82270973);陕西省自然科学基础研究计划-面上项目(2021JM-235);陕西省重点研发计划(2021SF-032)

The effect of sonic activated device used for different time on intracanal smear layer removal: An SEM analysis

XIAO Min¹,LIU Jin²,FAN Xiaomin¹,WU Haoze¹,WANG Jueyu¹,WANG Kejing¹,LI Na¹,JIANG Wenkai¹(),MEI Xiaohan¹()

State Key Laboratory of Military Stomatology & National Clinical Research Center for Oral Diseases & Shaanxi Key Laboratory of Stomatology, Department of Operative Dentistry & Endodontics, School of Stomatology, Fourth Military Medical University, Xi'an 710032, China

Revised:2022-09-15 Online:2023-01-28 Published:2023-01-11
Contact: JIANG Wenkai,MEI Xiaohan

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 目的通过扫描电子显微镜(SEM)观察不同作用时间下根管壁玷污层的清除情况,以明确临床中使用声波辅助设备荡洗根管的最佳时间。方法选择单直根管的人离体前牙56颗,常规机械预备后根据冲洗剂不同分为2个实验组:生理盐水组和EDTA组,每组均辅助使用声波驱动的VDW荡洗工作尖完成根管荡洗。生理盐水组根据荡洗时间分为3个亚组:5 s组,30 s组,50 s组;EDTA组根据荡洗时间分为6个亚组:5 s组,10 s组,20 s组,30 s组,40 s组,50 s组。对照组不进行根管冲洗及荡洗。SEM观察根管壁冠、中、根三段的玷污层情况。结果生理盐水组荡洗30 s后冠方1/3与对照组及5 s组相比差异有统计学意义(P<0.05),根中下段无差异(P>0.05);50 s后根尖区玷污层评分与其余各组评分相比差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。EDTA组荡洗5或10 s后,根管中上段玷污层评分与对照组相比差异有统计学意义(P<0.05),根尖区无意义(P>0.05);20 s~40 s组根尖区与前两组相比差异有统计学意义(P<0.05);50 s组根尖区与其余各组相比均存在明显差异(P<0.05)。对比两个实验组间荡洗50 s后的玷污层清洁效果,根管全段均表现出明显统计学差异(P<0.05)。结论 EDTA辅助使用声波荡洗50 s玷污层清洁效果最佳。

关键词: 根管冲洗, 声波荡洗, 玷污层, EDTA, 扫描电子显微镜

Abstract: Objective To observe the clearance of smear layer on the root canal wall in different action time by scanning electron microscope (SEM), and to determine the optimal amount of time using sonically activated irrigation to wash root canal in clinic. Methods Fifty-six ex vivo human anterior teeth with single straight root canal were selected. After routine mechanical preparation, they were divided into two experimental groups according to different irrigating agents: saline group and EDTA group. Each group was assisted by VDW sonic activation EDDY. The saline group was divided into three subgroups according to the irrigating time: 5 s, 30 s and 50 s; EDTA group was divided into six subgroups according to the irrigating time: 5 s, 10 s, 20 s, 30 s, 40 s and 50 s. The control group did not undergo root canal irrigation. After irrigation, the root was cut longitudinally. The smear layer of crown, middle and apical of root canal wall was observed by SEM. Results After irrigating for 30 seconds, there was a significant difference between the normal saline group and the control group and the 5 second group (P<0.05), and there was no difference in the middle and apical part (P>0.05). After 50 seconds, there was a significant difference in the score of the smear layer between the apical area and the other groups (P<0.05). After irrigating for 5 seconds or 10 seconds in EDTA group, there was a significant difference between the scores of the crown and middle area of the root canal and the control group (P<0.05), and there was no significant difference in the apical area (P>0.05). There was a significant difference between the 20-40 second group and the first two groups (P<0.05). There was a significant difference between the 50 second group and the other groups (P<0.05). Comparing the cleaning effect on the smear layer after 50 seconds of irrigating between the two experimental groups, the whole root canal showed significant statistical difference (P<0.05). Conclusion The EDTA-assisted sonic activated device used for 50 seconds has the best cleaning effect.

Key words: root canal irrigation, sonic activation, smear layer, EDTA, scanning electron microscope

中图分类号:

R781.05

肖敏, 刘瑾, 范晓敏, 吴昊泽, 王珏钰, 王可境, 李娜, 蒋文凯, 梅笑寒. 利用扫描电子显微镜分析声波辅助根管荡洗作用时间对玷污层清理效果的影响[J]. 口腔医学, 2023, 43(1): 46-51.

XIAO Min, LIU Jin, FAN Xiaomin, WU Haoze, WANG Jueyu, WANG Kejing, LI Na, JIANG Wenkai, MEI Xiaohan. The effect of sonic activated device used for different time on intracanal smear layer removal: An SEM analysis[J]. Stomatology, 2023, 43(1): 46-51.

图/表 4

图1

图2

图3

图4

参考文献 24

[1]	Teixeira CS, Felippe MCS, Felippe WT. The effect of application time of EDTA and NaOCl on intracanal smear layer removal: An SEM analysis[J]. Int Endod J, 2005, 38(5):285-290. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2591.2005.00930.x pmid: 15876291
[2]	Nogo-Živanović D, Kanjevac T, Bjelović L, et al. The effect of final irrigation with MTAD, QMix, and EDTA on smear layer removal and mineral content of root canal dentin[J]. Microsc Res Tech, 2019, 82(6):923-930. doi: 10.1002/jemt.23239
[3]	Arslan H, Akcay M, Capar ID, et al. An in vitro comparison of irrigation using photon-initiated photoacoustic streaming, ultrasonic, sonic and needle techniques in removing calcium hydroxide[J]. Int Endod J, 2015, 48(3):246-251. doi: 10.1111/iej.12306 pmid: 24786363
[4]	Zeng C, Willison J, Meghil MM, et al. Antibacterial efficacy of an endodontic sonic-powered irrigation system:An in vitro study[J]. J Dent, 2018, 75:105-112. doi: 10.1016/j.jdent.2018.06.003
[5]	丁群, 郑晶, 王安, 等. 六种冲洗器械对根管内氢氧化钙封药清除效果的研究[J]. 临床口腔医学杂志, 2018, 34(11):674-677.
[6]	梅笑寒, 刘瑾, 程小刚, 等. 超声、声波、激光辅助根管冲洗技术在体外根管感染模型中消毒作用的研究[J]. 中国实用口腔科杂志, 2021, 14(6):686-692.
[7]	Caron G, Nham K, Bronnec F, et al. Effectiveness of different final irrigant activation protocols on smear layer removal in curved canals[J]. J Endod, 2010, 36(8):1361-1366. doi: 10.1016/j.joen.2010.03.037 pmid: 20647097
[8]	Shi L, Wan J, Yang Y, et al. Evolution of the combined effect of different irrigation solutions and activation techniques on the removal of smear layer and dentin microhardness in oval-shaped root canal: An in-vitro study[J]. Bosn J Basic Med Sci, 2022:2022Jul25.
[9]	Velozo C, Prado VFF, Sousa I, et al. Scope of preparation of oval and long-oval root canals:A review of the literature[J]. Sci World J, 2021, 2021:5330776.
[10]	Bakthavatchalam B, Ranjani MS, Amudhalakshmi K. Comparativeevaluation of cleaning efficacy of self-adjusting file and Wave One file:An in vitro scanning electron microscopic study[J]. Contemp Clin Dent, 2019, 10(3):542-547. doi: 10.4103/ccd.ccd_160_19
[11]	Sinsareekul C, Hiran-Us S. Comparison of the efficacy of three different supplementary cleaning protocols in root-filled teeth with a bioceramic sealer after retreatment: A micro-computed tomographic study[J]. Clin Oral Investig, 2022, 26(4):3515-3521. doi: 10.1007/s00784-021-04320-w
[12]	Plotino G, Özyürek T, Grande NM, et al. Influence of size and taper of basic root canal preparation on root canal cleanliness:A scanning electron microscopy study[J]. Int Endod J, 2019, 52(3):343-351. doi: 10.1111/iej.13002 pmid: 30129186
[13]	Barcellos DPDC, Farina AP, Barcellos R, et al. Effect of a new irrigant solution containing glycolic acid on smear layer removal and chemical/mechanical properties of dentin[J]. Sci Rep, 2020, 10(1):7313. doi: 10.1038/s41598-020-64450-1 pmid: 32355304
[14]	Briseño-Marroquín B, Callaway A, Shalamzari NG, et al. Antibacterial efficacy of peracetic acid in comparison with sodium hypochlorite or chlorhexidine against Enterococcus faecalis and Parvimonas micra[J]. BMC Oral Health, 2022, 22(1):119. doi: 10.1186/s12903-022-02148-8 pmid: 35397605
[15]	Tonini R, Salvadori M, Audino E, et al. Irrigating solutions and activation methods used in clinical endodontics:A systematic review[J]. Front Oral Health, 2022, 3:838043. doi: 10.3389/froh.2022.838043
[16]	Tashkandi N, Alghamdi F. Effect ofchemical debridement and irrigant activation on endodontic treatment outcomes:An updated overview[J]. Cureus, 2022, 14(1):e21525.
[17]	Donnermeyer D, Wyrsch H, Bürklein S, et al. Removal of calcium hydroxide from artificial grooves in straight root canals:Sonic activation using EDDY versus passive ultrasonic irrigation and XP endo finisher[J]. J Endod, 2019, 45(3):322-326. doi: S0099-2399(18)30754-4 pmid: 30803540
[18]	Plotino G, Grande NM, Mercade M, et al. Efficacy of sonic and ultrasonic irrigation devices in the removal of debris from canal irregularities in artificial root canals[J]. J Appl Oral Sci, 2019, 27:e20180045. doi: 10.1590/1678-7757-2018-0045
[19]	Plotino G, Grande NM, Tocci L, et al. Influence of different apical preparations on root canal cleanliness in human molars:A SEM study[J]. J Oral Maxillofac Res, 2014, 5(2):e4.
[20]	朱勇, 李子夏, 谢娜. 微波联合乙二胺四乙酸对根管显微硬度的影响[J]. 安徽医药, 2016, 20(6):1150-1151.
[21]	张含, 王素苹, 任颖超, 等. 不同辅助根管冲洗技术对根管壁清洁效果的实验研究[J]. 口腔医学研究, 2021, 37(9):805-809. doi: 10.13701/j.cnki.kqyxyj.2021.09.008
[22]	肖芳, 祝雅琳, 戴群. 超声、声波和传统冲洗方法对根管玷污层清除效果的比较研究[J]. 江西医药, 2021, 56(5):557-558, 570.
[23]	Rius L, Arias A, Aranguren JM, et al. Analysis of the smear layer generated by different activation systems:An in vitro study[J]. Clin Oral Investig, 2021, 25(1):211-218. doi: 10.1007/s00784-020-03355-9
[24]	王晓娜, 石晶. 新型饵激光与超声对根管荡洗作用的对比研究[J]. 口腔医学, 2021, 41(4):328-332.

利用扫描电子显微镜分析声波辅助根管荡洗作用时间对玷污层清理效果的影响

The effect of sonic activated device used for different time on intracanal smear layer removal: An SEM analysis

RichHTML

PDF

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

图/表 4

参考文献 24

相关文章 13

编辑推荐

Metrics

本文评价

[1]	王如玉,潘雅慧,聂蓉蓉,孟翔峰. 超声处理对牙本质玷污层性状及粘接强度的影响[J]. 口腔医学, 2023, 43(1): 52-56.
[2]	邢春霞聂蓉蓉孟翔峰杨洁. 不同牙体预备车针所致玷污层对自粘接型树脂水门汀粘结强度的影响[J]. , 2019, 39(5): 423-426.
[3]	王颖吴连俊吴红霞赵永旗陈晖邓淑丽. 三种根管冲洗液对根管内可疑致病菌的抑制作用分析[J]. , 2019, 39(1): 25-29.
[4]	陈勇闵丽. 机用镍钛器械与超声根管冲洗联合应用于慢性根尖周炎一次性根管治疗的临床研究[J]. , 2018, 38(2): 162-165.
[5]	金莉顾新华. MTAD作为根管冲洗剂的效果评价[J]. , 2018, 38(1): 15-18.
[6]	郭姜莉甄蕾焦红卫孙嘉方. 不同超声冲洗液和不同时间对根管预备后清洁效果的扫描电镜观察[J]. , 2016, 36(1): 44-49.
[7]	马燕. Glyde凝胶联合次氯酸钠根管清理的疗效观察[J]. , 2011, 31(8): 497-498.
[8]	夏克俭,李姮,王文梅. Carisolv去龋及酸蚀后牙本质表面形态扫描电镜观察[J]. , 2010, 30(01): 46-48.
[9]	冯朝华;沈嵩;高学军. 次氯酸钠对粪肠球菌杀菌效果的体外研究[J]. , 2007, 27(10): 513-515.
[10]	何帅;陈吉华;王光耀;苗鸿雁;张斌;王辉. 两种饰面瓷材料与牙科氧化锆支架材料烧结界面的研究[J]. , 2006, 26(3): 161-163.
[11]	杨杭玲；武影. 含糖饮料对离体牙釉质的影响的实验研究[J]. , 1999, 19(2): 81-83.
[12]	吴国英；孙卫斌. 三种冲洗剂根管清洁作用的实验研究(扫描电镜观察)[J]. , 1999, 19(1): 9-10.
[13]	刘鲁川,王光华,洪法廉. 评价牙本质表面不同清洁处理的意义[J]. , 1994, 14(1): 13-.