Abstract Objective This study aimed to analyze the effect of irradiation on the push-out bond strength of mineral trioxide aggregate (MTA) and Biodentine to radicular dentin. Methodology A total of 60 extracted mature human teeth with single root canals were categorized into two groups (irradiated and non-irradiated) (n=30). Each group was further divided into two sub-groups based on cements used (Biodentine and MTA). Then, a cumulative radiation dose of 60 Gy was divided into 30 fractions (two Gy for every fraction) and administered for five successive days per week over six weeks. Obturation was then performed using MTA and Biodentine. Afterwards, 1.5 mm thick horizontal sections were procured from the middle one-third of all the specimens and then subjected to push-out bond test. Results were analyzed using one-way analysis of variance with post-hoc Tukey’s test. Results The bond strength of Biodentine and MTA to irradiated teeth was lower than non-irradiated teeth. Highest push-out bond strength was observed in non-irradiated specimens filled with Biodentine (p=0), followed by irradiated specimens filled with Biodentine (p=0); non-irradiated specimens filled with MTA (p=0); and irradiated specimens filled with MTA (p=0.9). Conclusion The push-out bond strength of Biodentine and MTA to root canal dentin decreased significantly post irradiation.

ABSTRACT Objective: To assess the efficacy of 5% Glycolic Acid (GA), 17% ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA) and 7% maleic acid (MA), in removing the smear layer (SL). Material and Methods: For the experiment, forty single-rooted human teeth were selected. To perform the chemo‑mechanical preparation, the root canals were instrumented to an apical size of #30, along with simultaneous irrigation of 2.5% NaOCl. The samples were allotted to the experimental groups based on the final irrigating solution (n=10): (1) The GA group: 05%, (2) the EDTA group: 17%, (3) the MA group: 7%, and (4) the control group: Distilled water. The teeth were evaluated for the presence or absence of SL using SEM. Results: Comparing the 5% GA, 7% MA and 17% EDTA groups, no statistically significant differences were found at the coronal and middle thirds (p>0.05). However, in the apical third, MA had greater efficacy than EDTA (p=0.002) and GA (p=0.041), with a significant difference in the SL removal, while there was no significant difference between the latter (p=0.148). Conclusion: Thus, it was concluded that 7% maleic acid as a final irrigating solution is more efficacious than 17% EDTA and 5% glycolic acid in eliminating the smear layer from the apical portion of the root canal.