Medical and Dental Consultantsí Association of Nigeria
Home - About us - Editorial board - Search - Ahead of print - Current issue - Archives - Submit article - Instructions - Subscribe - Advertise - Contacts - Login 
  Users Online: 351   Home Print this page Email this page Small font sizeDefault font sizeIncrease font size
 
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Year : 2017  |  Volume : 20  |  Issue : 3  |  Page : 328-334

Effects of seven different irrigation techniques on debris and the smear layer: a scanning electron microscopy study


1 Private Practice, Mersin, Turkey
2 Department of Endodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Cukurova University, Adana, Turkey

Correspondence Address:
A Dumanı
Department of Endodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Cukurova University, Adana
Turkey
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/1119-3077.180061

Rights and Permissions

Aim: Conventional manual irrigation with a syringe and needle remains widely accepted technique in the irrigation procedures. However, its flushing action has some limitations. Currently, several techniques and systems are available and reported to improve the insufficiency of syringe irrigation. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of 7 different irrigation techniques compared to standard irrigation. Materials and Methods: Straight roots from 80 extracted human maxillary central incisors were collected, and root canals were instrumented with K-files up to apical size 50. The teeth were randomly divided into 8 groups (n = 10), and final irrigation procedures were performed with 17% ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid and 5.25% NaOCl solutions using following irrigation agitation techniques: RinsEndo, EndoVac, Canal CleanMax, sonic, Canal Brush, NaviTip FX, manual dynamic irrigation, and conventional irrigation. The presence of debris and smear layer (SL) at coronal, middle, and apical thirds was evaluated by using a 5-grade scoring system with ×200 and ×1000 magnification, respectively. Results: Concerning debris removal, the MM 1500 sonic group reduced apical debris significantly better than the other groups tested (P < 0.05). There was no significant difference among the tested groups (P > 0.05) related SL removal in all levels. Conclusions: MM 1500 scored best with debris removal; however, there was no significant reduction in the SL in apical third with any of the methods tested.


[FULL TEXT] [PDF]*
Print this article     Email this article
 Next article
 Previous article
 Table of Contents

 Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
 Citation Manager
 Access Statistics
 Reader Comments
 Email Alert *
 Add to My List *
 * Requires registration (Free)
 

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed1327    
    Printed48    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded228    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal