Effect of Two Natural Irrigations on Canal Cleanliness and Microhardness of Root Canal Dentin

Abstract

The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of two different natural irrigations (Propolis and Curcumin), as regard to: Canal cleanliness and Microhardness of root canal dentin. Sixty extracted human single rooted premolar teeth were used. Decoronation was done and standardization of length at 16 mm. Grooves were performed on the external mesial and distal surfaces to facilitate splitting after instrumentation. Samples were divided into three equal groups (20 each) according to the type of irrigant being used: • Group (1): 4% Propolis (4 gm Propolis / 100 ml dimethyl sulfoxide). • Group (2): 0.25% Curcumin (0.25 gm Curcumin /100 ml dimethyl sulfoxide). • Group (3): 2.5% Sodium hypochlorite. Each group was further subdivided into two equal subgroups (10 each) according to the method of evaluation. • Subgroup A: For evaluation of canal cleanliness. • Subgroup B: For evaluation of microhardness of root canal dentin. Evaluation of Canal cleanliness: After root canal instrumentation, longitudinal sectioning of the samples was done by #15 surgical blade. Images of the split roots were done by Stereomicroscope. Using the image analysis software, percentage of debris for Cervical, middle and apical thirds was calculated by dividing the pixels of debris by the total pixels representing the entire area of the canal. For subgroup A, from each group, two representative samples were selected blindly and gold sputtered to be viewed by scanning electron microscope (SEM) to verify the results of different irrigating materials on the cervical, middle and apical thirds of each root canal. Data was collected and statistically analyzed. Evaluation of Microhardness: The root samples were longitudinally split and the most proper and obvious half of each sample was embedded in autopolymerized acrylic resin. The samples were ground flat and smooth with a series of increasing finer polishing papers. The measurements were taken using Vicker’s microhardness tester at three different points for each sample on the cervical, middle and apical thirds. Data was collected and statistically analyzed.