The efficacy of different irrigation protocols in removing tricalcium silicate‐based sealers from simulated root canal irregularities

Abstract

Objective The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of different irrigation protocols in removing two tricalcium silicate‐based sealers from simulated root canal irregularities and root canal walls. Material and methods Root canals of 140 single‐rooted teeth were instrumented. In one‐half of each root, an apical groove was created. The samples were divided into two main groups (n = 70) based on the sealer used. In group 1, the grooves were filled with MTA Fillapex; in group 2, BioRoot RCS. The reassembled root halves were divided into six experimental and one control groups: 2.5% NaOCl‐17% EDTA (Passive ultrasonic irrigation [PUI]), 5% NaOCl/9% DualRinse HEDP (PUI), 2.5% NaOCl‐7% Maleic acid (PUI), 2.5% NaOCl‐17% EDTA (Er:YAG laser activated irrigation [LAI]), 2.5% NaOCl/9% DualRinse HEDP (LAI), 2.5% NaOCl‐7% Maleic acid (LAI), Distilled water (Control). Specimens were scored using SEM. The data were analysed using Kruskal‐Wallis and Mann Whitney U tests. Results Maleic acid and DualRinse HEDP removed higher amounts of MTA Fillapex from the grooves compared to EDTA, when used with both activation methods (p < .001). Conclusions Ultrasonically activated maleic acid or DualRinse HEDP can be an effective irrigation regimen in removing tricalcium silicate‐based sealers.

Effect of continuous chelation irrigation using DualRinse HEDP/3% NaOCL with or without high-power sonic activation on debris and smear layer removal.

“…These results also indicate that high-power sonic activation with EDDY of the novel DualRinse HEDP mixed with 3% NaOCl contributes to better canal wall cleaning at all root levels. This is in accordance with other studies using EDDY with other irrigants ( 1 , 20 , 21 ).…”

Efficacy of different irrigation agitation systems in the removal of root canal sealers from artificial standardised grooves

“…The methodology of the present study is modelled on that of previous studies investigating the effect of irrigation techniques on the removal of root canal sealers [12,13,15]. In the current study, APJ sealer, a sealer which is widely used, and SSR sealer (CSBS) which has become popular in recent years due to its enhanced bonding ability, sealing ability and biocompatibility, were preferred.…”

“…These studies have shown that irrigation agitation techniques remove more calcium hydroxide than CSI [22][23][24]. However, few studies have evaluated the removal of AH plus and CSBS from root canals by using irrigation agitation systems [12,13]. A study evaluated the effect of 4 different irrigation agitation systems in removing AH Plus sealer from root canals [13].…”

“…Only two researches have evaluated the removal of CSBS from simulated root canal irregularities [12,21]. One of these studies researched that the efficacy of four different chelation agents agitated with different agitation systems was evaluated in terms of the removal of CSBS from simulated root canal irregularities.…”

“…The incomplete removal of root canal-filling materials may prevent the contact of irrigation solutions with persistent microorganisms in the canal, thus negatively affecting the success of the treatment [11]. In addition, while it is known that irrigation agitation systems are effective in removing calcium hydroxide acting as a canal medicament from artificial standardised grooves, there are few studies regarding the removal of root canal sealers from root canal irregularities [12,13]. However, there is no study evaluating the efficacy of irrigation agitation systems in the removal of bioceramic sealers from root canal irregularities.…”