Effect of Different Final Irrigation Activation Methods on Root Canal Cleanliness

Abstract

Aim: to evaluate canal cleanliness after using manual dynamic activation, passive ultrasonic irrigation and photoactivated disinfection in comparison with conventional needle irrigation, using scanning electron microscopy Methods: Sixty single rooted human premolars with nearly straight single canal were collected, the crowns of all teeth were removed near the level of cementoenamel junction to obtain approximately 15 ±1 mm uniform root lengths. After instrumentaion with ProTaper Next files up to X4 (40/06), roots were randomly divided into 4 equal groups (n=15) according to the method of final irrigation activation. Group I: Conventional needle and syringe irrigation. Group II: Manual dynamic activation. Group III: passive ultrasonic irrigation. Group IV: photoactivated disinfection. Canal cleanliness was evaluated with SEM using different magnification (X350-X1000).Results: Group III had the best cleanliness of the root canal while Group I had the worst cleanliness, there were statistical significant differences between Group I versus Groups II and III and between Group III and Group IV (P ≤ 0.05). Regardless the irrigation activation method, the coronal level showed significantly less amount of smear layer and remaining debris than the apical level.Conclusions: None of the tested final irrigation activation methods resulted in completely clean canal wall.

Effect of different root canal irrigants on push-out bond strength of two novel root-end filling materials

“…During the root canal preparation, the root canals were initially irrigated with 1 mL of one of the previously mentioned irrigants for 1 min after each instrumentation using a side-vented needle (24/0.4), and then with 5 mL sterile distilled water followed by 1 mL 17% EDTA (Maquira, Maringa, Brazil) as the final rinse after the whole instrumentation procedure. Lastly, root canals were flushed with 5 mL sterile distilled water and then dried using sterile paper points [ 17 , 56 ].…”