IATs improve intracanal cleanliness across a substantial portion of the canal , and therefore , their use is recommended throughout root canal preparation .
AIMS To establish whether irrigant activation techniques ( IATs ) result in greater intracanal smear layer and debris removal than conventional needle irrigation ( CNI ) .
Efficacy of the self-adjusting file system on cleaning and shaping oval canals: a microbiological and microscopic evaluation.
INTRODUCTION The shaping ability of root canal instruments is determined by a complex interrelationship of parameters such as cross-sectional design and the ability to remove debris and the smear layer . The self-adjusting file ( SAF ) consists of a hollow , flexible instrument in the form of a compressible , thin-walled , pointed cylinder . The aim of this study was to compare the SAF with the ProTaper rotary file system , evaluating debris and smear layer removal and the presence of bacteria by using microbiological and scanning electron microscopy ( SEM ) evaluation . METHODS Fifty maxillary premolars were inoculated with Enterococcus faecalis for 30 days and then r and omly distributed into 2 groups . Group 1 was prepared with ProTaper rotary instruments and irrigated with 30-gauge side-vented needles . Group 2 was prepared by using the SAF system with continuous irrigation . Bacteriologic sample s were taken before and after preparation . All sample s were then longitudinally split and analyzed under scanning electron microscopy . The scoring was carried out by 3 blinded evaluators . RESULTS In group 1 , 40 % of sample s had negative cultures with postinstrumentation sample s taken with paper points ( S2a ) and 45 % with postinstrumentation dentin sample s ( S2b ) . In group 2 , 20 % of sample s had negative cultures with S2a and 15 % with S2b . Intragroup analyses evaluating the reduction in the number of colony-forming units ( CFUs ) from S1 to S2a and S2b demonstrated both preparation techniques were highly effective ( P < .01 ) . Further reduction of CFUs was observed when comparing S2a and S2b in group 1 ( P < .05 ) , whereas no difference was observed in group 2 . Intergroup analysis demonstrated a statistically significant difference of CFUs at S2a and S2b ( P < .05 ) . SEM scores were consistent with the microbiology findings . CONCLUSIONS The SAF system does not allow control of the apical enlargement , thus limiting the ability of the irrigants to achieve effective and predictable disinfection
IATs improve intracanal cleanliness across a substantial portion of the canal , and therefore , their use is recommended throughout root canal preparation .
AIMS To establish whether irrigant activation techniques ( IATs ) result in greater intracanal smear layer and debris removal than conventional needle irrigation ( CNI ) .