INTRODUCTION: The aim of this study was to evaluate the removal of dentin debris from artificially made grooves in standardized root canals by 6 different final irrigation techniques. METHODS: Conventional syringe irrigation, manual dynamic activation (MDA) with tapered or nontapered gutta-percha (GP) cones, the Safety Irrigator system, continuous ultrasonic irrigation (CUI), and apical negative pressure (ANP) irrigation were tested ex vivo in 20 root canals with a standardized, debris-filled groove in the apical portion of one canal wall. After each irrigation procedure, the groove was photographed, and the residual amount of dentin debris was scored. RESULTS: There was no significant difference between the MDA with a nontapered GP cone, the Safety Irrigator, and the ANP irrigation. These techniques produced better cleaning efficacy than syringe irrigation (P < .005) but significantly worse than the MDA with a tapered cone (P < .05). CUI was significantly better than all the other techniques tested in this study (P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: CUI was the most effective technique in dentin debris removal from the apical irregularities, and syringe irrigation alone was the least effective. MDA technique was more effective with a tapered GP cone than with a nontapered one.
INTRODUCTION: The aim of this study was to evaluate the removal of dentin debris from artificially made grooves in standardized root canals by 6 different final irrigation techniques. METHODS: Conventional syringe irrigation, manual dynamic activation (MDA) with tapered or nontapered gutta-percha (GP) cones, the Safety Irrigator system, continuous ultrasonic irrigation (CUI), and apical negative pressure (ANP) irrigation were tested ex vivo in 20 root canals with a standardized, debris-filled groove in the apical portion of one canal wall. After each irrigation procedure, the groove was photographed, and the residual amount of dentin debris was scored. RESULTS: There was no significant difference between the MDA with a nontapered GP cone, the Safety Irrigator, and the ANP irrigation. These techniques produced better cleaning efficacy than syringe irrigation (P < .005) but significantly worse than the MDA with a tapered cone (P < .05). CUI was significantly better than all the other techniques tested in this study (P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: CUI was the most effective technique in dentin debris removal from the apical irregularities, and syringe irrigation alone was the least effective. MDA technique was more effective with a tapered GP cone than with a nontapered one.
Authors: Wan-chun Zhu; Jacqueline Gyamfi; Li-na Niu; G John Schoeffel; Si-ying Liu; Filippo Santarcangelo; Sara Khan; Kelvin C-Y Tay; David H Pashley; Franklin R Tay Journal: J Dent Date: 2013-08-28 Impact factor: 4.379
Authors: Chen Yuanyuan; Zhang Wenhui; Guo Bin; Guo Xiaolong; Huang Shilu; Long Hu; Fu Min; Yang Manxin; Lü Yan Journal: Hua Xi Kou Qiang Yi Xue Za Zhi Date: 2015-04
Authors: Juan Pacheco-Yanes; José C Provenzano; Marília F Marceliano-Alves; Isbelia Gazzaneo; Alejandro R Pérez; Lúcio S Gonçalves; José F Siqueira Journal: Clin Oral Investig Date: 2019-06-26 Impact factor: 3.573