Cargando…

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...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Alkahtani, Ahmed, Al Khudhairi, Tala D, Anil, Sukumaran
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2014
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3927625/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24512441
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1472-6831-14-12
_version_ 1782304155783659520
author Alkahtani, Ahmed
Al Khudhairi, Tala D
Anil, Sukumaran
author_facet Alkahtani, Ahmed
Al Khudhairi, Tala D
Anil, Sukumaran
author_sort Alkahtani, Ahmed
collection PubMed
description 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 aimed 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 randomly 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.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3927625
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2014
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-39276252014-02-19 A comparative study of the debridement efficacy and apical extrusion of dynamic and passive root canal irrigation systems Alkahtani, Ahmed Al Khudhairi, Tala D Anil, Sukumaran BMC Oral Health Research Article 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 aimed 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 randomly 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. BioMed Central 2014-02-11 /pmc/articles/PMC3927625/ /pubmed/24512441 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1472-6831-14-12 Text en Copyright © 2014 Alkahtani et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly credited. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research Article
Alkahtani, Ahmed
Al Khudhairi, Tala D
Anil, Sukumaran
A comparative study of the debridement efficacy and apical extrusion of dynamic and passive root canal irrigation systems
title A comparative study of the debridement efficacy and apical extrusion of dynamic and passive root canal irrigation systems
title_full A comparative study of the debridement efficacy and apical extrusion of dynamic and passive root canal irrigation systems
title_fullStr A comparative study of the debridement efficacy and apical extrusion of dynamic and passive root canal irrigation systems
title_full_unstemmed A comparative study of the debridement efficacy and apical extrusion of dynamic and passive root canal irrigation systems
title_short A comparative study of the debridement efficacy and apical extrusion of dynamic and passive root canal irrigation systems
title_sort comparative study of the debridement efficacy and apical extrusion of dynamic and passive root canal irrigation systems
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3927625/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24512441
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1472-6831-14-12
work_keys_str_mv AT alkahtaniahmed acomparativestudyofthedebridementefficacyandapicalextrusionofdynamicandpassiverootcanalirrigationsystems
AT alkhudhairitalad acomparativestudyofthedebridementefficacyandapicalextrusionofdynamicandpassiverootcanalirrigationsystems
AT anilsukumaran acomparativestudyofthedebridementefficacyandapicalextrusionofdynamicandpassiverootcanalirrigationsystems
AT alkahtaniahmed comparativestudyofthedebridementefficacyandapicalextrusionofdynamicandpassiverootcanalirrigationsystems
AT alkhudhairitalad comparativestudyofthedebridementefficacyandapicalextrusionofdynamicandpassiverootcanalirrigationsystems
AT anilsukumaran comparativestudyofthedebridementefficacyandapicalextrusionofdynamicandpassiverootcanalirrigationsystems