Assessment of Smear Layer Removal and Penetration Depth of Root Canal Irrigant Using Different Irrigation Activation Systems: A Comparative Study.

Q3 Dentistry
Mohan D Pujari, Maneesha Das, Asutosh Das, Dinesh G Kamath, Junu Henry, Arun Shyam, Doaa M Alhaleis
{"title":"Assessment of Smear Layer Removal and Penetration Depth of Root Canal Irrigant Using Different Irrigation Activation Systems: A Comparative Study.","authors":"Mohan D Pujari, Maneesha Das, Asutosh Das, Dinesh G Kamath, Junu Henry, Arun Shyam, Doaa M Alhaleis","doi":"10.5005/jp-journals-10024-3626","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Aim: </strong>The aim of the current study was to evaluate the penetration depth and smear layer removal of root canal irrigant using various irrigation activation techniques.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>In this investigation, sixty single-rooted premolars extracted for orthodontic purposes were chosen. Diamond burs were used to create an access cavity, and #10 K-file was used to determine the patency. About sixty samples were divided into the following three groups (20 samples in each group), group I: Irrigation with conventional needle, group II: Activation of EndoVac system, group III: Passive ultrasonic irrigation (PUI). The efficacy of the smear layer was assessed using a scanning electron microscopy at a ×2000 magnification. One-way ANOVA was used to record and analyze the data. All statistical analyses were performed with a significance level of <i>p</i> < 0.05.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>At coronal third, the maximum smear layer was removed in group II (1.26 ± 0.02) followed by group III (1.84 ± 0.16) and group I (2.89 ± 0.21). At middle third, smear layer removal was maximum in group I (1.18 ± 0.10) followed by group III (1.72 ± 0.09) and group I (2.66 ± 0.18). At apical third, the more smear layer was removed in group II (1.02 ± 0.01) followed by group III (1.58 ± 0.08) and group I (2.38 ± 0.06). There was a highly significant difference found between the three different irrigation systems at all three levels (<i>p</i> < 0.001).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>In conclusion, every irrigation device that was evaluated was successful in removing the smear layer from the root canal. However, the EndoVac system group removed a greater amount of smear layer compared with PUI and conventional needle group.</p><p><strong>Clinical significance: </strong>With the goal of promoting cleaning that is beyond the ability of mechanical devices, irrigation is a crucial part of root canal therapy. If an efficient irrigation delivery system is used, the irrigants can reach the working length (WL). This type of distribution system needs to provide a suitable amount of irrigants up to the WL, as well as have enough flow and be effective at debriding the entire canal system. How to cite this article: Pujari MD, Das M, Das A, <i>et al</i>. Assessment of Smear Layer Removal and Penetration Depth of Root Canal Irrigant Using Different Irrigation Activation Systems: A Comparative Study. J Contemp Dent Pract 2024;25(4):331-334.</p>","PeriodicalId":35792,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Contemporary Dental Practice","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Contemporary Dental Practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5005/jp-journals-10024-3626","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Dentistry","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Aim: The aim of the current study was to evaluate the penetration depth and smear layer removal of root canal irrigant using various irrigation activation techniques.

Materials and methods: In this investigation, sixty single-rooted premolars extracted for orthodontic purposes were chosen. Diamond burs were used to create an access cavity, and #10 K-file was used to determine the patency. About sixty samples were divided into the following three groups (20 samples in each group), group I: Irrigation with conventional needle, group II: Activation of EndoVac system, group III: Passive ultrasonic irrigation (PUI). The efficacy of the smear layer was assessed using a scanning electron microscopy at a ×2000 magnification. One-way ANOVA was used to record and analyze the data. All statistical analyses were performed with a significance level of p < 0.05.

Results: At coronal third, the maximum smear layer was removed in group II (1.26 ± 0.02) followed by group III (1.84 ± 0.16) and group I (2.89 ± 0.21). At middle third, smear layer removal was maximum in group I (1.18 ± 0.10) followed by group III (1.72 ± 0.09) and group I (2.66 ± 0.18). At apical third, the more smear layer was removed in group II (1.02 ± 0.01) followed by group III (1.58 ± 0.08) and group I (2.38 ± 0.06). There was a highly significant difference found between the three different irrigation systems at all three levels (p < 0.001).

Conclusion: In conclusion, every irrigation device that was evaluated was successful in removing the smear layer from the root canal. However, the EndoVac system group removed a greater amount of smear layer compared with PUI and conventional needle group.

Clinical significance: With the goal of promoting cleaning that is beyond the ability of mechanical devices, irrigation is a crucial part of root canal therapy. If an efficient irrigation delivery system is used, the irrigants can reach the working length (WL). This type of distribution system needs to provide a suitable amount of irrigants up to the WL, as well as have enough flow and be effective at debriding the entire canal system. How to cite this article: Pujari MD, Das M, Das A, et al. Assessment of Smear Layer Removal and Penetration Depth of Root Canal Irrigant Using Different Irrigation Activation Systems: A Comparative Study. J Contemp Dent Pract 2024;25(4):331-334.

使用不同冲洗活化系统对根管冲洗剂涂抹层去除和渗透深度的评估:比较研究
目的:本研究旨在评估根管冲洗剂在使用各种冲洗激活技术时的渗透深度和涂抹层去除情况:本次研究选择了六十颗因正畸而拔出的单根前臼齿。使用金刚石车针创建通路洞,使用 10 号 K 型锉确定通畅性。约 60 个样本被分为以下三组(每组 20 个样本):第一组:传统针头灌洗;第二组:激活 EndoVac 系统;第三组:被动超声波灌洗(PUI)。涂片层的效果使用 ×2000 倍率的扫描电子显微镜进行评估。采用单因素方差分析来记录和分析数据。所有统计分析的显著性水平均为 p <0.05:在冠状三分之一处,第二组(1.26 ± 0.02)去除的涂片层最多,其次是第三组(1.84 ± 0.16)和第一组(2.89 ± 0.21)。在中三分之一处,涂片层去除最多的是 I 组(1.18 ± 0.10),其次是 III 组(1.72 ± 0.09)和 I 组(2.66 ± 0.18)。在根尖三分之一处,第二组(1.02 ± 0.01)去除的涂片层最多,其次是第三组(1.58 ± 0.08)和第一组(2.38 ± 0.06)。三种不同的灌洗系统在所有三个层面上都有非常显著的差异(P < 0.001):总之,所有接受评估的冲洗设备都能成功去除根管中的涂抹层。然而,与 PUI 和传统针头组相比,EndoVac 系统组清除的涂片层更多:临床意义:冲洗的目的是促进机械装置无法达到的清洁效果,因此冲洗是根管治疗的关键部分。如果使用高效的灌洗输送系统,灌洗液就能到达工作长度(WL)。这种灌溉系统需要提供适量的灌溉剂到达工作长度(WL),同时还要有足够的流量,并能有效地对整个根管系统进行清创。如何引用本文:Pujari MD, Das M, Das A, et al:比较研究。J Contemp Dent Pract 2024;25(4):331-334.
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Contemporary Dental Practice
Journal of Contemporary Dental Practice Dentistry-Dentistry (all)
CiteScore
1.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
174
期刊介绍: The Journal of Contemporary Dental Practice (JCDP), is a peer-reviewed, open access MEDLINE indexed journal. The journal’s full text is available online at http://www.thejcdp.com. The journal allows free access (open access) to its contents. Articles with clinical relevance will be given preference for publication. The Journal publishes original research papers, review articles, rare and novel case reports, and clinical techniques. Manuscripts are invited from all specialties of dentistry i.e., conservative dentistry and endodontics, dentofacial orthopedics and orthodontics, oral medicine and radiology, oral pathology, oral surgery, orodental diseases, pediatric dentistry, implantology, periodontics, clinical aspects of public health dentistry, and prosthodontics.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信