Efficacy of passive ultrasonic irrigation, continuous ultrasonic irrigation versus irrigation with reciprocating activation device in penetration into main and simulated lateral canals

Abstract

Context: The use of chemicals solutions and means of activation is of utmost importance in endodontic treatment. Aims: This study compared three activation techniques used in the final irrigation of the endodontic treatment. Subjects and Methods: Eighty uniradicular teeth were instrumented with the Protaper Universal system up to F4 file. After decalcification, the teeth had artificial lateral canals created at 2, 4.5 and 6 mm from working length (WL). The groups were randomly divided into four groups ( n = 20): control group (C), passive ultrasonic irrigation (PUI) group, continuous ultrasonic irrigation (CUI) group, and easy clean (EC) group. The penetration of the irrigant into the samples was evaluated using image observation using the Image J program. Statistical Analysis Used: The level of agreement among the observers was determined by the Cronbach's alpha test. The likelihood ratio test was used to evaluate possible differences between the groups and the Kendall's W statistic test to verify possible differences between the irrigant penetration levels in the lateral canals. The Fisher's exact test was applied to verify differences by the studied group considering the WL variables and lateral canals. Results: The results showed no statistical difference in the penetration of the irrigator in the main canal when compared to the C, PUI, CUI, and EC groups ( P > 0.05). Conclusions: The method using a positive syringe and needle pressure was not able to effectively carry the irrigator to the artificially made lateral canals, whereas PUI, CUI, and EC were equally efficient in this regard ( P < 0.01).

To compare the continuous and intermittent irrigation method on the removal of dentin debris from root canals and to evaluate the dynamics of irrigant flow using computational fluid dynamics

“…The passive ultrasonic continuous and intermittent irrigation methods were compared and evaluated by various researchers. [ 2 11 14 15 ] This study confirmed with the earlier found results and found continuous irrigation to be a more efficient method than the intermittent method of passive ultrasonic irrigation. However, the effect of time was insignificant in the present study which was in accordance with certain studies[ 2 11 ] but varied from other studies.…”