Alinne Patiery Pacífico Oliveira Feitosa, Arthur Costa Lemos, Suyane Maria Luna-Cruz, Ana Grasiela Limoeiro, Murilo Priori Alcalde, Rodrigo Ricci Vivan, Marco Antônio Hungaro Duarte, Bruno Carvalho Vasconcelos
{"title":"Debris Removal from Mandibular Molars Using Different Irrigation Volumes and Ultrasonic Tips: Micro-CT Study.","authors":"Alinne Patiery Pacífico Oliveira Feitosa, Arthur Costa Lemos, Suyane Maria Luna-Cruz, Ana Grasiela Limoeiro, Murilo Priori Alcalde, Rodrigo Ricci Vivan, Marco Antônio Hungaro Duarte, Bruno Carvalho Vasconcelos","doi":"10.4317/jced.62892","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>This study compared the impact of varying irrigating solution volumes and two ultrasonic tips on removing hard tissue debris (HTD) during passive ultrasonic irrigation (PUI) in mesial roots of mandibular molars.</p><p><strong>Material and methods: </strong>Sixty roots were instrumented using WaveOne Gold 35/.06 divided into 5 groups (<i>n</i>=12): Irrisonic 6 mL (IR6), Irrisonic 30 mL (IR30), Irrisonic Power 6 mL (IRP6), Irrisonic Power 30 mL (IRP30), and a control group with conventional irrigation. Microcomputed Tomography was used to measure HTD removal. Statistical analysis used ANOVA, Tukey, and t-Student tests (α = 5%).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Significant differences were observed in HTD removal between the IR30, IRP6, IRP30 groups, and the control group (<i>P</i> < 0.0001), while no statistical significance was found between IR6 and the control group (<i>P</i> > 0.05). A statistical difference was observed between IR30 and IR6 (<i>P</i> < 0.05). IR30 achieved the highest debris removal rate (87.63%), while IR6 showed the lowest (80.16%). Significant differences were observed between experimental and control groups (<i>P</i> < 0.05), except for IR6 (<i>P</i> > 0.05).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>A larger volume of irrigating solution (30 mL compared to 6 mL) during the PUI protocol resulted in greater removal of HTD. Additionally, the Irrisonic Power tip did not significantly enhance HTD removal. <b>Key words:</b>Endodontics, Passive Ultrasonic Irrigation, Root Canal Irrigant, Ultrasonic tip, X-ray microtomography.</p>","PeriodicalId":15376,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Clinical and Experimental Dentistry","volume":"17 8","pages":"e891-e896"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12424600/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Clinical and Experimental Dentistry","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4317/jced.62892","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Dentistry","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: This study compared the impact of varying irrigating solution volumes and two ultrasonic tips on removing hard tissue debris (HTD) during passive ultrasonic irrigation (PUI) in mesial roots of mandibular molars.
Material and methods: Sixty roots were instrumented using WaveOne Gold 35/.06 divided into 5 groups (n=12): Irrisonic 6 mL (IR6), Irrisonic 30 mL (IR30), Irrisonic Power 6 mL (IRP6), Irrisonic Power 30 mL (IRP30), and a control group with conventional irrigation. Microcomputed Tomography was used to measure HTD removal. Statistical analysis used ANOVA, Tukey, and t-Student tests (α = 5%).
Results: Significant differences were observed in HTD removal between the IR30, IRP6, IRP30 groups, and the control group (P < 0.0001), while no statistical significance was found between IR6 and the control group (P > 0.05). A statistical difference was observed between IR30 and IR6 (P < 0.05). IR30 achieved the highest debris removal rate (87.63%), while IR6 showed the lowest (80.16%). Significant differences were observed between experimental and control groups (P < 0.05), except for IR6 (P > 0.05).
Conclusions: A larger volume of irrigating solution (30 mL compared to 6 mL) during the PUI protocol resulted in greater removal of HTD. Additionally, the Irrisonic Power tip did not significantly enhance HTD removal. Key words:Endodontics, Passive Ultrasonic Irrigation, Root Canal Irrigant, Ultrasonic tip, X-ray microtomography.
期刊介绍:
Indexed in PUBMED, PubMed Central® (PMC) since 2012 and SCOPUSJournal of Clinical and Experimental Dentistry is an Open Access (free access on-line) - http://www.medicinaoral.com/odo/indice.htm. The aim of the Journal of Clinical and Experimental Dentistry is: - Periodontology - Community and Preventive Dentistry - Esthetic Dentistry - Biomaterials and Bioengineering in Dentistry - Operative Dentistry and Endodontics - Prosthetic Dentistry - Orthodontics - Oral Medicine and Pathology - Odontostomatology for the disabled or special patients - Oral Surgery