Debris Removal from Mandibular Molars Using Different Irrigation Volumes and Ultrasonic Tips: Micro-CT Study.

Q2 Dentistry
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.

Abstract Image

不同灌洗量及超声针尖去除下颌磨牙碎片的微ct研究。
背景:本研究比较了不同灌洗液体积和两种超声针尖对下颌磨牙近中根被动超声灌洗(PUI)去除硬组织碎片(HTD)的影响。材料和方法:用WaveOne Gold 35/.06对60根根进行根管灌管,分为5组(n=12): Irrisonic 6ml (IR6)、Irrisonic 30ml (IR30)、Irrisonic Power 6ml (IRP6)、Irrisonic Power 30ml (IRP30)和常规灌管对照组。微计算机断层扫描用于测量HTD的去除。统计分析采用ANOVA、Tukey和t-Student检验(α = 5%)。结果:IR30、IRP6、IRP30组HTD去除率与对照组比较,差异有统计学意义(P < 0.0001), IR6组与对照组比较,差异无统计学意义(P < 0.05)。IR30与IR6比较,差异有统计学意义(P < 0.05)。IR30的碎屑去除率最高(87.63%),IR6的碎屑去除率最低(80.16%)。除IR6外,试验组与对照组间差异均有统计学意义(P < 0.05)。结论:在PUI方案中,更大体积的冲洗液(30ml比6ml)导致HTD的去除更大。此外,Irrisonic Power尖端并没有显著增强HTD的去除。关键词:牙髓学,被动超声冲洗,根管冲洗剂,超声尖端,x线显微断层扫描。
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
CiteScore
2.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
118
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
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信