Comparative Evaluation of Different Methods of Activation of Chelating Solution for Smear Layer Removal in the Apical...

Background The smear layer has an adverse effect on the sealing of root canals during obturation, and it is the main reason for the failure of root canal treatment. Root canal irrigation using a conventional irrigation system is ineffective for smear layer removal, especially from the apical third region, where most lateral canals are present. For successful endodontic treatment, the smear layer should be removed from the apical third region using an effective irrigation activation system. Aim This study aimed to compare smear layer removal by conventional irrigation, XP Endo Finisher (XPF), endoactivator (EA), passive ultrasonic activation, and root canal brush using 17% ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA) as a chelating solution and 5.25% sodium hypochlorite after chemomechanical preparation, using scanning electron microscopy (SEM). Method A total of 50 extracted human mandibular single canal premolars with mature roots were selected for this study. Samples were decoronated to obtain a standard working length (WL) of 15 mm. Canal patency was achieved using a 10 k file. Samples were sealed with sticky wax to obtain the vapor lock effect. Biomechanical preparation is done till F3. The samples were divided into five groups according to the final irrigation activation protocol: Group 1, control group; group 2, XPF; group 3, EA; group 4, passive ultrasonic irrigation (PUI); and group 5,, root canal brush. Samples were divided into two equal halves longitudinally. Each sample was analyzed for a smear layer under SEM at 2000x magnification. Statistical analysis was done using the one-way Anova "F" test and Tukey's post-hoc test. Results Group 3 showed the least presence of a smear layer, followed by groups 4, 2, 5, and 1. All the groups exhibited highly significant differences between each other (p < 0.001). Group B shows no significant difference with groups C, D, and E. Group C shows no significant difference with groups D and E. Group D shows no significant difference with group E. Conclusion The EA removes the smear layer effectively as compared with other groups. All the irrigation activation system shows the presence of smear layer. No activation systems were able to remove the smear layer completely.