Los puntos clave no están disponibles para este artículo en este momento.
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.
Das et al. (Fri,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: