Search citation statements
Paper Sections
Citation Types
Year Published
Publication Types
Relationship
Authors
Journals
Virdee SS, Seymour DW, Farnell D, Bhamra G, Bhakta S. Efficacy of irrigant activation techniques in removing intracanal smear layer and debris from mature permanent teeth: a systematic review and meta-analysis. International Endodontic Journal.Aims To establish whether irrigant activation techniques (IATs) result in greater intracanal smear layer and debris removal than conventional needle irrigation (CNI). Methodology Six electronic databases were searched to identify scanning electron microscopy studies evaluating smear layer and/or debris removal following the use of manual dynamic activation (MDA), passive ultrasonic irrigation (PUI), sonic irrigation (SI) or apical negative pressure (ANP) IATs in mature permanent teeth. Meta-analyses were performed for each canal segment (coronal, middle, apical and apical 1 mm) in addition to subgroup analyses for individual IATs with respect to CNI. Outcomes were presented as standardized mean differences (SMD) alongside 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) and chi-squared analysis.Results From 252 citations, 16 studies were identified. The meta-analyses demonstrated significant improvements in coronal (SMD: 1.15, 95% CI: 0.72-1.57 / SMD: 0.54, 95% CI: 0.29-0.80), middle (SMD: 1.30, 95% CI: 0.59-2.53 / SMD: 0.8, 95% CI: 0.58-1.13) and apical thirds (SMD: 1.22, 95% CI: 0.83-1.62 / SMD: 1.86, 95% CI: 0.76-2.96) for smear layer and debris removal, respectively. In the apical 1 mm IATs improved cleanliness; however, differences were insignificant (SMD: 1.15, 95% CI: -0.47-2.77). Chi-squared analysis revealed heterogeneity scores of 79.3-92.8% and 0.0-93.5% for smear layer and debris removal, respectively. Conclusions IATs improve intracanal cleanliness across a substantial portion of the canal, and therefore, their use is recommended throughout root canal preparation. However, current data is too heterogeneous to compare and identify superiority of an individual technique highlighting the need to standardize experimental protocols and develop a more representative research model to investigate the in vivo impact of IATs on clinical outcomes and periapical healing following root canal treatment.
Virdee SS, Seymour DW, Farnell D, Bhamra G, Bhakta S. Efficacy of irrigant activation techniques in removing intracanal smear layer and debris from mature permanent teeth: a systematic review and meta-analysis. International Endodontic Journal.Aims To establish whether irrigant activation techniques (IATs) result in greater intracanal smear layer and debris removal than conventional needle irrigation (CNI). Methodology Six electronic databases were searched to identify scanning electron microscopy studies evaluating smear layer and/or debris removal following the use of manual dynamic activation (MDA), passive ultrasonic irrigation (PUI), sonic irrigation (SI) or apical negative pressure (ANP) IATs in mature permanent teeth. Meta-analyses were performed for each canal segment (coronal, middle, apical and apical 1 mm) in addition to subgroup analyses for individual IATs with respect to CNI. Outcomes were presented as standardized mean differences (SMD) alongside 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) and chi-squared analysis.Results From 252 citations, 16 studies were identified. The meta-analyses demonstrated significant improvements in coronal (SMD: 1.15, 95% CI: 0.72-1.57 / SMD: 0.54, 95% CI: 0.29-0.80), middle (SMD: 1.30, 95% CI: 0.59-2.53 / SMD: 0.8, 95% CI: 0.58-1.13) and apical thirds (SMD: 1.22, 95% CI: 0.83-1.62 / SMD: 1.86, 95% CI: 0.76-2.96) for smear layer and debris removal, respectively. In the apical 1 mm IATs improved cleanliness; however, differences were insignificant (SMD: 1.15, 95% CI: -0.47-2.77). Chi-squared analysis revealed heterogeneity scores of 79.3-92.8% and 0.0-93.5% for smear layer and debris removal, respectively. Conclusions IATs improve intracanal cleanliness across a substantial portion of the canal, and therefore, their use is recommended throughout root canal preparation. However, current data is too heterogeneous to compare and identify superiority of an individual technique highlighting the need to standardize experimental protocols and develop a more representative research model to investigate the in vivo impact of IATs on clinical outcomes and periapical healing following root canal treatment.
Dear Editor, We wrote this letter by the reason of Dr. Ballal's valuable proposal. 1 1. As it is mentioned before in the material and method section, 'in order to avoid affecting the dentin and root canal contents' without isotonic saline solution, we did not use any chemical. Because the affects of the chemical materials or heat can cause reactions and differences in the evaluated tissues. 2. In the working length determination, the canal lengths were usually established by placing a size 15 K file (Kerr, Romulus, MI, USA) into each root canal until the tip of the file was visible at the tip of the apical foramen. We thank Dr. Ballal for his attention. 3. We referred to our statistical bureau according to Dr. Ballal's point of view, but he insisted on Kruskal-Wallis and Mann-Whitney U-tests are the correct tests. 4. Root canal irrigants are introduced into the root canal system deeply when using a safe-ended endodontic syringe. The fact that an open-ended (ordinary) 23 gauge endodontic syringe may cause the irrigation solution through the apex, the needle insertion must be carefully applied in fact. Unfortunately, many of the studies used open-ended syringe systems for root canal irrigation. 5. We think if it is read carefully, it is clear.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2025 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.