Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
AIM: To compare the efficacy of photon-induced photoacoustic streaming (PIPS) technique with conventional, sonic and ultrasonic irrigation on the removal of apically placed dentinal debris from an artificial groove created in a root canal. METHODOLOGY: Root canal preparation was performed up to size 40 on 48 extracted single-rooted teeth using ProTaper rotary instruments. The specimens were then split longitudinally, and a standardized groove was prepared in the apical part of each segment. Each groove was filled with dentinal debris mixed with 5% NaOCl. Each tooth was reassembled and irrigated as follows: (i) conventional irrigation with 1% NaOCl, (ii) sonic, (iii) ultrasonic irrigation, and (iv) PIPS. The root segments were disassembled, and the amount of remaining dentinal debris was evaluated under a stereomicroscope at 20× magnification, using a four-grade scoring system. The data were evaluated statistically using Kruskal-Wallis and Mann-Whitney U-tests with a 95% confidence level (P = 0.05). RESULTS: Photon-induced photoacoustic streaming removed significantly more dentinal debris than conventional irrigation (P < 0.001), sonic irrigation (P < 0.001) or ultrasonic irrigation (P = 0.005). There was no significant difference between sonic and ultrasonic irrigation (P = 0.377). CONCLUSIONS: Photon-induced photoacoustic streaming was more effective than conventional, sonic and ultrasonic irrigation in the removal of apically placed dentinal debris.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Arslan et al. (2014) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: