International Journal of Clinical Pediatric Dentistry

Register      Login

SEARCH WITHIN CONTENT

FIND ARTICLE

Volume / Issue

Online First

Archive
Volume  17 (2024)
Volume  16 (2023)
Volume  15 (2022)
Volume  14 (2021)
Volume  13 (2020)
Volume  12 (2019)
Volume  11 (2018)
Volume  10 (2017)
Volume  9 (2016)
Volume  8 (2015)
Volume  7 (2014)
Volume  6 (2013)
Volume  5 (2012)
Volume  4 (2011)
Volume  3 (2010)
Volume  2 (2009)
Volume  1 (2008)
Related articles

VOLUME 17 , ISSUE 6 ( June, 2024 ) > List of Articles

ORIGINAL RESEARCH

Qualitative and Quantitative Evaluation of the Effects of Different Chelating Agents on the Calcium Content of Root Canal Dentin Using Atomic Absorption Spectrophotometer: An In Vitro Study

Pragya Singhal, Deepak Raisingani, Ashwini B Prasad, Jyoti Yadav, Harshit Srivastava, Shourya Kriti

Keywords : Atomic absorption spectrophotometry, Chelating agent, Chlorhexidine, Ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid, Etidronic acid, SmearClear

Citation Information : Singhal P, Raisingani D, Prasad AB, Yadav J, Srivastava H, Kriti S. Qualitative and Quantitative Evaluation of the Effects of Different Chelating Agents on the Calcium Content of Root Canal Dentin Using Atomic Absorption Spectrophotometer: An In Vitro Study. Int J Clin Pediatr Dent 2024; 17 (6):647-652.

DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10005-2903

License: CC BY-NC 4.0

Published Online: 22-08-2024

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2024; The Author(s).


Abstract

Aims and background: Evaluation of the effects of different chelating agents on the calcium loss of root canal dentin. Materials and methods: Around 65 single-rooted teeth were collected and decoronated. The working length was determined, and biomechanical preparation was done in a crown-down fashion using the HyFlex Control Memory rotary nickel-titanium (Ni-Ti) system until apical preparation of 30.04. Canals were irrigated with chelating agents and sodium hypochlorite between each file insertion. Based on the type of chelating agents used, the samples were randomly divided into five groups (n = 13)—group I, liquid ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA); group II, EDTA and chlorhexidine (CHX); group III, etidronic acid; group IV, SmearClear; and group V (control), distilled water. The total volume of the solution used was collected, and calcium ion release was quantified using an atomic absorption spectrophotometer. The qualitative analysis was done by observing the acetylene (C2H2)/air flame. Images were obtained for each sample, compared, and analyzed. Results: With respect to the control group, groups IV and I show a statistically significant difference compared to groups II and III (p < 0.05). Qualitatively, the highest intensity was observed in group IV and the least intensity in group III. Conclusion: SmearClear showed significantly higher decalcifying capability compared to EDTA, EDTA and CHX, and etidronic acid. Hence, its combined use with an organic solvent can be recommended for efficient smear layer removal. Clinical significance: Minimally invasive endodontic treatment is aimed at preserving the strength of the treated tooth without compromising cleaning effectiveness. Therefore, comparing the efficacy of different chelating agents will be promising with respect to maximum calcium loss both qualitatively and quantitatively.

PDF Share
  1. Anju PK, Purayil TP, Ginjupalli K, et al. Effect of chelating agents on push-out bond strength of NeoMTA Plus to root canal dentin. Pesqui Bras Odontopediatria Clínica Integr 2022;22:1–9. DOI: 10.1590/pboci.2022.005
  2. Yadav HK, Tikku AP, Chandra A, et al. Efficacy of Etidronic acid, BioPure MTAD and SmearClear in removing calcium ions from the root canal: an in vitro study. Eur J Dent 2019;9(4):523–528. DOI: 10.4103/1305-7456.172613
  3. Teja KV, Janani K, Alqahtani AA, et al. Herbal agents versus ethylene diamine tetra acetic acid on removal of the smear layer-a systematic review of in vitro studies. Int J Environ Res Pub Health 2022;19(11):68–70. DOI: 10.3390/ijerph19116870
  4. Nogueira BM, Pereira TI, Pedrinha VF, et al. Effects of different irrigation solutions and protocols on mineral content and ultrastructure of root canal dentin. Iran Endod J 2018;13(2):209–215. DOI: 10.22037/iej.v13i2.19287
  5. Abd-Elgawad RA, Fayyad DM. Comparative evaluation of smear layer removal, calcium ions loss and dentin microhardness after different final irrigation solutions. Egypt Dent J 2017;63(4):3551–3562. DOI: 10.21608/edj.2017.76277
  6. Pivatto K, Pedro FL, Guedes OA, et al. Cytotoxicity of chelating agents used in endodontics and their influence on MMPs of cell membranes. Brazilian Dent J 2020;31(1):32–36. DOI: 10.1590/0103-6440202002812
  7. Pedro FL, Costa LM, Filho GS, et al. Assessment of the amount of calcium ions released after the use of different chelating agents and agitation protocols. Open Dent J 2017;11:133–139. DOI: 10.2174/1874210601711010133
  8. Spanó JC, Silva RG, Costa Guedes DF, et al. Atomic absorption spectrometry and scanning electron microscopy evaluation of concentration of calcium ions and smear layer removal with root canal chelators. J Endod 2009;35(5):727–730. DOI: 10.1016/j.joen.2009.02.008
  9. Cobankara FK, Erdogan H, Hamurcu M. Effects of chelating agents on the mineral content of root canal dentin. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 2011;112(6):149–154. DOI: 10.1016/j.tripleo.2011.06.037
  10. Silva LA, Sanguino AC, Rocha CT, et al. Scanning electron microscopic preliminary study of the efficacy of SmearClear and EDTA for smear layer removal after root canal instrumentation in permanent teeth. J Endod 2008;34(12):1541–1544. DOI: 10.1016/j.joen.2008.08.007
  11. Nelson-Filho P, Leite Gde A, Fernandes PM, et al. Efficacy of SmearClear and ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid for smear layer removal in primary teeth. J Dent Child (Chic) 2009;76(1):74–77.
  12. Vallabhaneni K, Kakarla P, Avula SSJ, et al. Comparative analyses of smear layer removal using four different irrigant solutions in the primary root canals – a scanning electron microscopic study. J Clin Diagn Res 2017;11(4):64–67. DOI: 10.7860/JCDR/2017/24163.9684
  13. Dua A, Dua D, Uppin VM. Evaluation of the effect of duration of application of SmearClear in removing intracanal smear layer: SEM study. Saudi Endod J 2015;5(1):26–32. DOI: 10.4103/1658-5984.149083
  14. Silva PV, Guedes DF, Pécora JD, et al. Time-dependent effects of chitosan on dentin structures. Braz Dent J 2012;23(4):357–361. DOI: 10.1590/s0103-64402012000400008
  15. Mohammadi Z, Shalavi S, Yaripour S, et al. Smear layer removing ability of root canal irrigation solutions: a review. J Contemp Dent Pract 2019;20(3):395–402.
  16. Hülsmann M, Hahn W. Complications during root canal irrigation–literature review and case reports. Int Endod J 2000;33(3):186–193. DOI: 10.1046/j.1365-2591.2000.00303.x
  17. Baumgartner JC, Broen CM, Mader CL, et al. A scanning electron microscopic evaluation of root canal debridement using saline, sodium hypochlorite, and citric acid. J Endod 1984;10(11):525–531. DOI: 10.1016/S0099-2399(84)80137-5
  18. Tartari T, Silva e Souza PDA, Almeida BVN, et al. A new weak chelator in endodontics: effects of different irrigation regimens with etidronate on root dentin microhardness. Int J Dent 2013;13:1–6. DOI: 10.1155/2013/743018
  19. Cruz-Filho AM, Sousa-Neto MD, Savioli RN, et al. Effect of chelating solutions on the microhardness of root canal lumen dentin. J Endod 2011;37(3):358–362. DOI: 10.1016/j.joen.2010.12.001
  20. Ari H, Erdemir A, Belli S. Evaluation of the effect of endodontic irrigation solutions on the microhardness and the roughness of root canal dentin. J Endod 2004;30(11):792–795. DOI: 10.1097/01.don.0000128747.89857.59
  21. De-Deus G, Paciornik S, Mauricio MH. Evaluation of the effect of EDTA, EDTAC and citric acid on the microhardness of root dentine. Int Endod J 2006;39(5):401–407. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2591.2006.01094.x
  22. Trope M, Ray HL Jr. Resistance to fracture of endodontically treated roots. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol 1992;73(1):99–102. DOI: 10.1016/0030-4220(92)90163-k
PDF Share
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.