Efficacy of Different Endodontic Irrigant Activation Systems on Smear Layer Removal and Canal Cleanliness: Comparative Scanning Electron Microscopic Study
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.3889/oamjms.2022.8652Keywords:
EDDY, EndoActivator, EndoVac, PUI, Smear layer removalAbstract
AIM: This study assessed the effectiveness of 5 different irrigant activation systems on canal cleanliness and removal of smear layer from root canals.
METHODS: A total of 110 mandibular premolars with straight root canal were assigned to five groups (n = 20): conventional needle irrigation, passive ultrasonic activation, sonic activation with EndoActivator, negative apical pressure EndoVac (EV), or EDDY system, besides a control group (n = 10). All teeth were prepared to size 40, and irrigated with NaOCl (5.25%) according to the respective technique. Roots were split longitudinally and subjected to scanning electron microscopic analysis. The presence of smear layer and debris was evaluated using 5-grade scoring systems with ×1000 and ×400 magnification, respectively. Data were analyzed at 5%.
RESULTS: Regarding the smear layer, activation with EV and ED was significantly more effective than other activation groups (p < 0.05). Activation of the irrigant significantly improved removal of debris (p < 0.05).
CONCLUSION: No activation technique was able to eliminate smear layer and debris completely from root canals, nevertheless, EDDY is significantly better in removing debris and smear layer from the apical third of the canal.Downloads
Metrics
Plum Analytics Artifact Widget Block
References
Pereira ES, da Cunha Peixoto IF, Nakagawa RK, Buono VT, de Azevedo Bahia MG. Cleaning the apical third of curved canals after different irrigation protocols. Braz Dent J. 2012;23(4):351-6. https://doi.org/10.1590/s0103-64402012000400007 PMid:23207848 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1590/S0103-64402012000400007
Tabassum S, Khan FR. Failure of endodontic treatment: The usual suspects. Eur J Dent. 2016;10(1):144-7. https://doi.org/10.4103/1305-7456.175682 PMid:27011754 DOI: https://doi.org/10.4103/1305-7456.175682
Peters OA, Arias A, Paque F. A micro-computed tomographic assessment of root canal preparation with a novel instrument, TRUShape, in mesial roots of mandibular molars. J Endod. 2015;41(9):1545-50. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2015.06.007 PMid:26238528 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2015.06.007
Arias-Moliz MT, Morago A, Ordinola-Zapata R, Ferrer-luque CM, Ruiz-Linares M, Baca P. Effects of dentin debris on the antimicrobial properties of sodium hypochlorite and etidronic acid. J Endod. 2016;42(5):771-5. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2016.01.021 PMid:26951957 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2016.01.021
de Gregorio C, Esteves R, Cisneros R, Paranjpe A, Cohenca N. Efficacy of different irrigation and activation systems on the penetration of Sodium hypochlorite in to simulated lateral canals and up to working length: An in vitro study. J Endod. 2010;36(7):1216-21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2010.02.019 PMid:20630302 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2010.02.019
Adcock JM, Sidow SJ, Looney SW, Liu Y, McNally K, Lindsey K, et al. Histologic evaluation of canal and Isthmus debridement efficacies of two different irrigant delivery techniques in a closed system. J Endod. 2011;37(4):544-8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2011.01.006 PMid:21419306 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2011.01.006
Saini M, Kumari M, Taneja S. Comparative evaluation of the efficacy of three different irrigation devices in removal of debris from root canal at two different levels: An in vitro study. J Conserv Dent. 2013;16(6):509-13. https://doi.org/10.4103/0972-0707.120959 PMid:24347883 DOI: https://doi.org/10.4103/0972-0707.120959
Alves FR, Andrade-Junior CV, Marceliano-Alves MF, Pérez AR, Rôças IN, Versiani MA, et al. Adjunctive steps for disinfection of the mandibular molar root canal system: A correlative bacteriology, micro-computed tomography, and cryopulverization approach. J Endod. 2016;42:1667-72. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2016.08.003 PMid:27641947 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2016.08.003
Paque F, Al-Jadaa A, Kafir A. Hard-tissue Debris accumulation created by conventional rotary versus self-adjusting file instrumentation of mandibular molars in mesial root canal systems. Int Endod J. 2012;45(5):413-8. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2591.2011.01991.x PMid:22188277 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2591.2011.01991.x
Rius L, Arias A, Aranguren JM, Romero M, de Gregorio C. Analysis of the smear layer generated by different Activation systems: An in vitro study. Clin Oral Investig. 2020;25(1):211-8. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-020-03355-9 PMid:32519236 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-020-03355-9
Gu LS, Kim JR, Ling J, Choi KK, Pashley DH, Tay FR. Review of contemporary irrigant agitation techniques and devices. J Endod. 2009;35(6):791-804. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2009.03.010 PMid:19482174 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2009.03.010
Haapasalo M, Shen Y, Qian W, Gao Y. Irrigation in endodontics. Dent Clin North Am. 2010;54(2):291-312. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cden.2009.12.001 PMid:20433979 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cden.2009.12.001
Urban K, Donnermeyer D, Schafer E, Burklein S. Canal cleanliness using different irrigation activation systems: A SEM evaluation. Clin Oral Investig. 2017;21(9):2681-7. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-017-2070-x PMid:28185091 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-017-2070-x
Plotino G, Grande NM, Mercade M, Cortese T, Staffoli S, Gambarini G, et al. Efficacy of sonic and ultrasonic irrigation devices in the removal of debris from canal irregularities in artificial root canals. J Appl Oral Sci. 2019;27:e20180045. https://doi.org/10.1590/1678-7757-2018-0045 PMid:30624461 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1590/1678-7757-2018-0045
Haupt F, Meinel M, Gunawardana A, Hülsmann M. Effectiveness of different activated irrigation techniques on debris and smear layer removal from curved root canals: A SEM evaluation. Aust Endod J. 2020;46(1):40-6. https://doi.org/10.1111/aej.12342 PMid:30907051 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/aej.12342
Tay FR, Gu LS, Schoeffel GJ, Wimmer C, Susin L, Zhang K, et al. Effect of vapor lock on root canal debridement by using a sidevented needle for positive-pressure irrigant delivery. J Endod. 2010;36(4):745-50. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2009.11.022 PMid:20307757 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2009.11.022
Abarajithan M, Dham S, Velmurugan N, Valerian-Albuquerque D, Ballal S, Senthilkumar H. Comparison of endovac irrigation system with conventional irrigation for removal of intracanal smear layer: An in vitro study. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2011;112(3):407-11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tripleo.2011.02.024 PMid:21664151 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tripleo.2011.02.024
Goel S, Tewari S. Smear layer removal with passive ultrasonic irrigation and the NaviTip FX: A scanning electron microscopic study. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2009;108(3):465-70. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tripleo.2009.04.023 PMid:19576804 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tripleo.2009.04.023
Sabins RA, Johnson JS, Hellstein JW. A comparison of the cleaning efficacy of short-term sonic and ultrasonic passive irrigation after hand instrumentation in molar root canals. J Endod. 2003;29(10):674-8. https://doi.org/10.1097/00004770-200310000-00016 PMid:14606795 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/00004770-200310000-00016
Mancini M, Cerroni L, Iorio L, Armellin E, Conte G, Cianconi L. Smear layer removal and canal cleanliness using different irrigation systems (EndoActivator, EndoVac, and passive ultrasonic irrigation): Field emission scanning electron microscopic evaluation in an in vitro study. J Endod. 2013;39(11):1456-60. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2013.07.028 PMid:24139274 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2013.07.028
Rödig T, Döllmann S, Konietschke F, Drebenstedt S, Hülsmann M. Effectiveness of different irrigant agitation techniques on debris and smear layer removal in curved root canals: A scanning electron microscopy study. J Endod. 2010;36(12):1983-7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2010.08.056 PMid:21092817 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2010.08.056
Garberoglio R, Brannstrom M. Scanning electron microscopic investigation of human dentinal tubules. Arch Oral Biol. 1976;21(6):355-62. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0003-9969(76)80003-9 PMid:1066114 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0003-9969(76)80003-9
Pashley DH. Dentin-predentin complex and its permeability: Physiologic overview. J Dent Res. 1985;24:613-20. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/002203458506400419
Yilmaz M, Yilmaz S, Dumani A, Kuden C, Yoldas O. Effects of seven different irrigation techniques on debris and the smear layer: A scanning electron microscopy study. Niger J Clin Pract. 2017;20(3):328-34. https://doi.org/10.4103/1119-3077.180061 PMid:28256488 DOI: https://doi.org/10.4103/1119-3077.180061
Boutsioukis C, Gogos C, Verhaagen B, Versluis M, Kastrinakis E, van der Sluis LW. The effect of apical preparation size on irrigant flow in root canals evaluated using an unsteady computational fluid dynamics model. Int Endod J. 2010;43(10):874-81. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2591.2010.01761.x PMid:20618879 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2591.2010.01761.x
Pérez-Heredia M, Ferrer-Luque CM, González-Rodríguez MP. The effectiveness of different acid irrigating solutions in root canal cleaning after hand and rotary instrumentation. J Endod. 2006;32(10):993-7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2006.05.016 PMid:16982281 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2006.05.016
Baker NA, Eleazer PD, Averbach RE, Seltzer S. Scanning electron microscopic study of the efficacy of various irrigating solutions. J Endod. 1975;1(4):127-35. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0099-2399(75)80097-5 PMid:765422 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0099-2399(75)80097-5
Ciucchi B, Khettabi M, Holz J. The effectiveness of different endodontic irrigation procedures on the removal of the smear layer: A scanning electron microscopic study. Int Endod J. 1989;22(1):21-8. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2591.1989.tb00501.x PMid:2513277 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2591.1989.tb00501.x
Alakshar A, Saleh AR, Gorduysus MO. Debris and smear layer removal from oval root canals comparing XP-endo finisher, endoactivator, and manual irrigation: A SEM evaluation. Eur J Dent. 2020;14(4):626-33. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0040-1714762 PMid:32777834 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0040-1714762
Adorno CG, Fretes VR, Ortiz CP, Mereles R, Sosa V, Yubero MF, et al. Comparison of two negative pressure systems and syringe irrigation for root canal irrigation: An ex vivo study. Int Endod J. 2016;49(2):174-83. https://doi.org/10.1111/iej.12431 PMid:25630894 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/iej.12431
Matos FS, da Silva FR, Paranhos LR, Moura CCG, Bresciani E, Valera MC. The effect of 17% EDTA and QMiX ultrasonic activation on smear layer removal and sealer penetration: Ex vivo study. Sci Rep. 2020;10(1):10311. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-67303-z PMid:32587397 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-67303-z
Thomas AR, Velmurugan N, Smita S, Jothilatha S. Comparative evaluation of canal isthmus debridement efficacy of modified EndoVac technique with different irrigation systems. J Endod. 2014;40(10):1676-80. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2014.05.014 PMid:25052146 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2014.05.014
De-Deus G, Marins J, Neves AA, Reis C, Fidel S, Versiani MA, et al. Assessing accumulated hard-tissue debris using microcomputed tomography and free software for image processing and analysis. J Endod. 2014;40(2):271-6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2013.07.025 PMid:24461417 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2013.07.025
Paqué F, Laib A, Gautschi H, Zehnder M. Hard-tissue debris accumulation analysis by high-resolution computed tomography scans. J Endod. 2009;35(7):1044-7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2009.04.026 PMid:19567331 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2009.04.026
Plotino G, Pameijer CH, Grande NM, Somma F. Ultrasonics in endodontics: A review of the literature. J Endod. 2007;33(2):81-95. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2006.10.008 PMid:17258622 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2006.10.008
Jiang LM, Verhaagen B, Versluis M, van der Sluis LW. Evaluation of a sonic device designed to activate irrigant in the root canal. J Endod. 2010;36(1):143-6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2009.06.009 PMid:20003954 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2009.06.009
Nielsen BA, Baumgartner JC. Comparison of the EndoVac system to needle irrigation of root canals. J Endod. 2007;33(5):611-5. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2007.01.020 PMid:17437884 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2007.01.020
Ribeiro EM, Silva-Sousa YT, Souza-Gabriel AE, Sousa-Neto MD, Lorencetti KT, Silva SR. Debris and smear removal in flattened root canals after use of different irrigant agitation protocols. Microsc Res Tech. 2012;75(6):781-90. https://doi.org/10.1002/jemt.21125 PMid:22131294 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/jemt.21125
Siu C, Baumgartner JC. Comparison of the debridement efficacy of the EndoVac irrigation system and conventional needle root canal irrigation in vivo. J Endod. 2010;36(11):1782-5. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2010.08.023 PMid:20951287 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2010.08.023
Schiavotelo TC, Coelho MS, Rasquin LC, Rocha DG, Fontana CE, Bueno CE. Ex-vivo smear layer removal efficacy of two activated irrigation techniques after reciprocating instrumentation in curved canals. Open Dent J. 2017;11(1):512-9. https://doi.org/10.2174/1874210601711010512 PMid:29238411 DOI: https://doi.org/10.2174/1874210601711010512
Jiang LM, Verhaagen B, Versluis M, Langedijk J, Wesselink P, van der Sluis LW. The influence of the ultrasonic intensity on the cleaning efficacy of passive ultrasonic irrigation. J Endod. 2011;37(5):688-92. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2011.02.004 PMid:21496672 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2011.02.004
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
Categories
License
Copyright (c) 2022 Bader A. Al-rujaib, Mohamed H. Zaghloul, Alaa Reda, Amany E. Badr (Author)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0
