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 ) .
A comparative study of the debridement efficacy and apical extrusion of dynamic and passive root canal irrigation systems
Background Root canal irrigation carries a risk of extrusion of irrigant into the periapical tissues which can be associated with pain , swelling , and tissue damage . Studies have shown less extrusion with sonic or apical negative pressure devices compared with syringe and side-port needle or passive ultrasonic irrigation with continuous irrigant flow . This study aim ed to evaluate the effectiveness of the EndoVac irrigation system , regarding 1 ) debris removal and 2 ) the control of apically extruded irrigating solution . Methods Fifty extracted human single-rooted teeth were used in this study . The teeth were then r and omly divided into three experimental groups according to the type of irrigation used and one control group . In group 1 , irrigation was performed using the EndoVac irrigation system . In group 2 , irrigation was performed using a 30-gauge , tip-vented irrigation needle . In group 3 , irrigation was performed using a 30-gauge , side-vented irrigation needle . The control group received instrumentation with no irrigation to serve as a control for cleaning efficiency . Root canal instrumentation was performed using the Profile NiTi rotary system with a crown-down technique . All of the experimental teeth were irrigated with the same amount of 5.25 % sodium hypochlorite . The amount of extruded irrigating solution was then measured by subtracting the post-instrumentation weight from the pre-instrumentation weight using an electronic balance . The cleanliness of debris removal was evaluated using scanning electron microscopy . Results EndoVac irrigation had the least amount of extrusion followed by the side-vented and tip-vented method . The difference between the groups was statistically significant ( P < 0.01 ) . As for the cleaning results , the debris collection in the EndoVac and tip-vented groups was the least in the apical third . In the control and the side-vented groups , the debris was the greatest in the apical third , but this difference was not significant among the three experimental groups . Conclusions The EndoVac irrigation system extruded significantly less irrigant solution than either needle irrigation system . Debris collection was the least in the apical third for the EndoVac irrigation system . No significant difference was found in the cleaning efficiency among the three irrigation systems
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 ) .