{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.03842264914054601, 'fraction_numerical': 0.01870576339737108, 'mean_word_length': 4.996969696969697, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 1, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Comparative evaluation and efficacy of ethylenediaminetetracetic acid, carbonated water, and chloroquick as final irrigant in smear layer removal using scanning electron microscope

Aim: The purpose of this study was to evaluate and compare the efficacy of EDTA, carbonated water, and chloroquick in smear layer removal at apical, middle, and coronal third of the root canal. Materials and Methods: Eighty freshly extracted human mandibular premolars were used for the study The teeth were decoronated to obtain standardized working length of 14 mm. All samples were instrumented with ProTaper gold till apical size #F3 with 3% NaOCl irrigation between each file. The samples were randomly divided into four groups (n = 20) on the basis of final irrigant used: Group I: 17% ethylenediaminetetracetic acid (EDTA), Group II: carbonated water, Group III: chloroquick solution, and Group IV: normal saline (negative control). The samples were then split into longitudinal sections and observed under scanning electron microscope (SEM) at apical, middle, and coronal levels for the amount of smear layer present. Statistical Analysis: Data were analyzed statistically using Kruskal–Wallis analysis of variance followed by the Mann–Whitney U-test and Chi-square test. The level of significance was set at 0.05. Results: The present study showed that all the three experimental irrigants removed the smear layer equally at the middle and coronal third. At the apical third, Group III (Chloroquick solution) showed the least smear layer score (2.20 ± 0.41) followed by Group I (17% EDTA) (2.35 ± 0.49) and then Group II (Carbonated water) (2.45 ± 0.51). The P value was found to be < 0.001. Conclusion: Chloroquick is more effective in smear layer removal in apical third followed by 17% EDTA and then carbonated water when used as final irrigant. No statistically significant result was found in smear layer removal among the three groups at coronal and middle third of the root canal.