Comparação in vitro da eficácia de diferentes formulações do gel de EDTA 24% no condicionamento da superfície radicular

• Autor(a) principal: Sousa, Cliciane Portela
• Data de Publicação: 2013
• Outros Autores: Frizzera, Fausto [UNESP], Batista, Luiz Henrique Carvalho, Dantas, Andrea Abi Rached [UNESP], Zandim-barcelos, Daniela Leal [UNESP], Sampaio, José Eduardo Cezar [UNESP]
• Tipo de documento: Artigo
• Idioma: por
• Título da fonte: Repositório Institucional da UNESP
• Texto Completo: http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S1807-25772013000100002; http://hdl.handle.net/11449/126168
• topic: EDTA; collagen; microscopy electron scanning; tooth root; EDTA; colágeno; microscopia eletrônica de varredura; raiz dentária

INTRODUCTION: The main goal of root biomodification is to modify the root surface in order to improve the repair of periodontal tissues destroyed by periodontal disease. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the conditioning efficacy of 24% EDTA gel of different trademarks, considering the variables time and application method, by scanning electron microscopy. MATERIAL AND METHOD: 225 samples were randomly assigned to five groups: sterile saline solution (control); 24% EDTA (Santa Paula Pharmacy); 24% EDTA-T (Santa Paula Pharmacy); 24% EDTA (PrefGel - Straumann); 24% EDTA (Biodinâmica). For each experimental group the gels were applied for 1, 2 or 3 minutes by topical application; vigorous or smooth friction. The Kruskal-Wallis and Dunn tests (p < 0,05) were used and individually applied to the variables commercial brand, time and type of application. RESULT: The statistical analysis showed that 24% EDTA Biodinâmica gel promoted less smear layer removal compared to the other groups. No significant differences could be detected among the different times of application. The smooth friction resulted in lower amount of residual smear layer. CONCLUSION: All 24% EDTA gels tested were able to remove smear layer and to expose dentinal tubules irrespective of application time; however, the application method by smooth friction was more effective than the other ones. The comparative analysis demonstrated that the Biodinâmica gel was the least effective product, promoting less smear layer removal and exposure of collagen fibers than the other EDTA gels.