Top

BMC Oral Health

Published in:

Open Access 01-12-2023 | Research

Efficacy of different irrigant activation techniques for cleaning root canal anastomosis

Authors: O. K. Montaser, D. M. Fayyad, N. Abdelsalam

Published in: BMC Oral Health | Issue 1/2023

Abstract

Objective

This study compared in vitro the anastomosis cleaning efficacy of different irrigant activation techniques at different levels; control group non-activation (NA), passive ultrasonic irrigation (PUI) using Irrisafe, and EDDY sonic activation.

Methods

Sixty anastomosis-containing mesial roots of mandibular molars were mounted in resin, sectioned at 2, 4, and 6 mm from the apex. Then reassembled and instrumented in a copper cube. For the irrigation technique roots were randomly divided into 3 groups (n = 20): group 1: NA, group 2: Irrisafe, group 3: EDDY. Stereomicroscopic images of anastomoses were taken after instrumentation and after irrigant activation. ImageJ program was used to calculate the percentage of anastomosis cleanliness. The percentage of cleanliness was calculated before and after final irrigation within each group and were then compared using paired t-tests. Intergroup and intragroup analyses were performed to compare between different activation techniques at the same root canal level (2, 4 and 6 mm) (intergroup) and to evaluate if each technique had different cleanliness efficacy according to the root canal level (intragroup) using one-way analysis of variance and post hoc tests (p < 0.05).

Results

All three irrigation techniques significantly improved anastomosis cleanliness (p < 0.001). Both activation techniques were significantly better than the control group at all levels. Intergroup comparison revealed that EDDY significantly achieved the best overall anastomosis cleanliness. The difference between EDDY and Irrisafe was significant in favor to EDDY at 2 mm and insignificant at 4 and 6 mm. The intragroup comparison showed that improvement in anastomosis cleanliness (i2-i1) in the needle irrigation without activation group (NA) was significantly higher in the apical 2 mm level compared to the 4 & 6 levels. While the difference in anastomosis cleanliness improvement (i2-i1) between levels in both Irrisafe and EDDY groups was insignificant.

Conclusions

Irrigant activation improves anastomosis cleanliness. EDDY was the most efficient in cleaning anastomoses located in the critical apical part of the root canal.

Clinical relevance

Cleaning and disinfection of the root canal system followed by apical and coronal sealing is the key for healing or prevention of apical periodontitis. Remnants of debris and microorganisms retained within the anastomoses (isthmuses), or other root canal irregularities may lead to persistent apical periodontitis. Proper irrigation and activation are essential for cleaning root canal anastomoses.

Nair PNR. On the causes of persistent apical periodontitis: a review. Int Endod J. 2006;39:249–81. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2591.2006.01099.x.CrossRefPubMed

Thomas AR, Velmurugan N, Smita S, Jothilatha S. Comparative Evaluation of Canal Isthmus Debridement Efficacy of Modified EndoVac Technique with Different Irrigation Systems. J Endod. 2014;40:1676–80. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2014.05.014.CrossRefPubMed

Kabak Y, Abbott PV. Prevalence of apical periodontitis and the quality of endodontic treatment in an adult Belarusian population. Int Endod J. 2005;38:238–45. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2591.2005.00942.x.CrossRefPubMed

Kirkevang L-L, Væth M, Hörsted-Bindslev P, et al. Risk factors for developing apical periodontitis in a general population. Int Endod J. 2007;40:290–9. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2591.2007.01224.x.CrossRefPubMed

van der Sluis LWM, Vogels MPJM, Verhaagen B, et al. Study on the Influence of Refreshment/Activation Cycles and Irrigants on Mechanical Cleaning Efficiency During Ultrasonic Activation of the Irrigant. J Endod. 2010;36:737–40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2009.12.004.CrossRefPubMed

Plotino G, Grande NM, Mercade M, et al. Efficacy of sonic and ultrasonic irrigation devices in the removal of debris from canal irregularities in artificial root canals. J Appl Oral Sci. 2019;27:e20180045. https://doi.org/10.1590/1678-7757-2018-0045.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Siqueira Junior JF, Rôças IDN, Marceliano-Alves MF, et al. Unprepared root canal surface areas: causes, clinical implications, and therapeutic strategies. Braz Oral Res. 2018;32:e65. https://doi.org/10.1590/1807-3107bor-2018.vol32.0065.CrossRefPubMed

Susin L, Liu Y, Yoon JC, et al. Canal and isthmus debridement efficacies of two irrigant agitation techniques in a closed system: Isthmus debridement in a closed canal system. Int Endod J. 2010;43:1077–90. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2591.2010.01778.x.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Fan B, Pan Y, Gao Y, et al. Three-dimensional Morphologic Analysis of Isthmuses in the Mesial Roots of Mandibular Molars. J Endod. 2010;36:1866–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2010.08.030.CrossRefPubMed

10.

Gu L-S, Ling J-Q, Huang X-Y, et al. A micro-computed tomographic study of the isthmus in the root canal system of mandibular first molar. Zhonghua Kou Qiang Yi Xue Za Zhi. 2009;44:11–4.PubMed

11.

Urban K, Donnermeyer D, Schäfer E, Bürklein S. Canal cleanliness using different irrigation activation systems: a SEM evaluation. Clin Oral Investig. 2017;21:2681–7. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-017-2070-x.CrossRefPubMed

12.

Bramante CM, Berbert A, Borges RP. A methodology for evaluation of root canal instrumentation. J Endod. 1987;13:243–5. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0099-2399(87)80099-7.CrossRefPubMed

13.

Schneider SW. A comparison of canal preparations in straight and curved root canals. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol. 1971;32:271–5. https://doi.org/10.1016/0030-4220(71)90230-1.CrossRefPubMed

14.

Passalidou S, Calberson F, De Bruyne M, et al. Debris Removal from the Mesial Root Canal System of Mandibular Molars with Laser-activated Irrigation. J Endod. 2018;44:1697–701. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2018.06.007.CrossRefPubMed

15.

Paqué F, Boessler C, Zehnder M. Accumulated hard tissue debris levels in mesial roots of mandibular molars after sequential irrigation steps: Debris reduction. Int Endod J. 2011;44:148–53. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2591.2010.01823.x.CrossRefPubMed

16.

Weiger R. Root canal irrigation: how much activation is necessary? Dtsch Zahnärztl Z Int. 2021;3:64–70. https://doi.org/10.3238/dzz-int.2021.0008.CrossRef

17.

Klyn SL, Kirkpatrick TC, Rutledge RE. In Vitro Comparisons of Debris Removal of the EndoActivatorTM System, the F FileTM, Ultrasonic Irrigation, and NaOCl Irrigation Alone after Hand-rotary Instrumentation in Human Mandibular Molars. J Endod. 2010;36:1367–71. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2010.03.022.CrossRefPubMed

18.

Duque JA, Duarte MAH, Canali LCF, et al. Comparative Effectiveness of New Mechanical Irrigant Agitating Devices for Debris Removal from the Canal and Isthmus of Mesial Roots of Mandibular Molars. J Endod. 2017;43:326–31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2016.10.009.CrossRefPubMed

19.

Rödig T, Koberg C, Baxter S, et al. Micro-CT evaluation of sonically and ultrasonically activated irrigation on the removal of hard-tissue debris from isthmus-containing mesial root canal systems of mandibular molars. Int Endod J. 2019;52:1173–81. https://doi.org/10.1111/iej.13100.CrossRefPubMed

20.

Schäfer E, Vlassis M. Comparative investigation of two rotary nickel-titanium instruments: ProTaper versus RaCe. Part 2. Cleaning effectiveness and shaping ability in severely curved root canals of extracted teeth. Int Endod J. 2004;37:239–48. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0143-2885.2004.00783.x.CrossRefPubMed

21.

Bürklein S, Schäfer E. The influence of various automated devices on the shaping ability of Mtwo rotary nickel-titanium instruments. Int Endod J. 2006;39:945–51. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2591.2006.01171.x.CrossRefPubMed

22.

Schafer E, Erler M, Dammaschke T. Comparative study on the shaping ability and cleaning efficiency of rotary Mtwo instruments. Part 2. Cleaning effectiveness and shaping ability in severely curved root canals of extracted teeth. Int Endod J. 2006;39:203–12. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2591.2006.01075.x.CrossRefPubMed

23.

Bürklein S, Hinschitza K, Dammaschke T, Schäfer E. Shaping ability and cleaning effectiveness of two single-file systems in severely curved root canals of extracted teeth: Reciproc and WaveOne versus Mtwo and ProTaper: Single-file systems - shaping and cleaning. Int Endod J. 2012;45:449–61. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2591.2011.01996.x.CrossRefPubMed

24.

Neuhaus KW, Liebi M, Stauffacher S, et al. Antibacterial Efficacy of a New Sonic Irrigation Device for Root Canal Disinfection. J Endod. 2016;42:1799–803. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2016.08.024.CrossRefPubMed

25.

Normanweller R, Niemczyk S, Kim S. Incidence and position of the canal isthmus. Part 1. Mesiobuccal root of the maxillary first molar. J Endod. 1995;21:380–3. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0099-2399(06)80975-1.CrossRef

26.

Estrela C, Rabelo LEG, de Souza JB, et al. Frequency of Root Canal Isthmi in Human Permanent Teeth Determined by Cone-beam Computed Tomography. J Endod. 2015;41:1535–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2015.05.016.CrossRefPubMed

27.

Paqué F, Laib A, Gautschi H, Zehnder M. Hard-Tissue Debris Accumulation Analysis by High-Resolution Computed Tomography Scans. J Endod. 2009;35:1044–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2009.04.026.CrossRefPubMed

28.

Alves FRF, Andrade-Junior CV, Marceliano-Alves MF, et al. Adjunctive Steps for Disinfection of the Mandibular Molar Root Canal System: A Correlative Bacteriologic, Micro-Computed Tomography, and Cryopulverization Approach. J Endod. 2016;42:1667–72. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2016.08.003.CrossRefPubMed

29.

Swimberghe RCD, De Clercq A, De Moor RJG, Meire MA. Efficacy of sonically, ultrasonically and laser-activated irrigation in removing a biofilm-mimicking hydrogel from an isthmus model. Int Endod J. 2019;52:515–23. https://doi.org/10.1111/iej.13024.CrossRefPubMed

30.

Haupt F, Meinel M, Gunawardana A, Hülsmann M. Effectiveness of different activated irrigation techniques on debris and smear layer removal from curved root canals: a SEM evaluation. Aust Endod J. 2019. https://doi.org/10.1111/aej.12342.CrossRefPubMed

31.

Howard RK, Kirkpatrick TC, Rutledge RE, Yaccino JM. Comparison of Debris Removal with Three Different Irrigation Techniques. J Endod. 2011;37:1301–5. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2011.05.008.CrossRefPubMed

32.

Linden D, Boone M, De Bruyne M, et al. Adjunctive Steps for the Removal of Hard Tissue Debris from the Anatomic Complexities of the Mesial Root Canal System of Mandibular Molars: A Micro-Computed Tomographic Study. J Endod. 2020;46(10):1508–14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2020.05.009.CrossRefPubMed

33.

Iandolo A, Amato M, Abdellatif D, et al. Effect of different final irrigation protocols on pulp tissue dissolution from an isthmus model. Aust Endod J. 2021;47(3):538–43. https://doi.org/10.1111/aej.12518.CrossRefPubMed

34.

Al Ahmari M, Al Maflehi N, Al Obaida M. A comparison of the cleaning efficacy of ProRinse ® syringe needle, ProUltra ® PiezoFlow TM, and EndoActivator ® irrigation techniques using software program ImageJ. Saudi Endod J. 2015;5:20. https://doi.org/10.4103/1658-5984.149082.CrossRef

35.

Khademi A, Yazdizadeh M, Feizianfard M. Determination of the Minimum Instrumentation Size for Penetration of Irrigants to the Apical Third of Root Canal Systems. J Endod. 2006;32:417–20. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2005.11.008.CrossRefPubMed

36.

Yoo Y-J, Lee W, Kim H-C, et al. Multivariate analysis of the cleaning efficacy of different final irrigation techniques in the canal and isthmus of mandibular posterior teeth. Restor Dent Endod. 2013;38:154. https://doi.org/10.5395/rde.2013.38.3.154.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

37.

Retsas A, Koursoumis A, Tzimpoulas N, Boutsioukis C. Uncontrolled Removal of Dentin during In Vitro Ultrasonic Irrigant Activation in Curved Root Canals. J Endod. 2016;42:1545–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2016.07.006.CrossRefPubMed

38.

Boutsioukis C, Tzimpoulas N. Uncontrolled Removal of Dentin during In Vitro Ultrasonic Irrigant Activation. J Endod. 2016;42:289–93. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2015.09.017.CrossRefPubMed

39.

Ruddle CJ. Endodontic Disinfection: The Sonic Advantage. Dent Today. 2017;36(84):86–7.

Title: Efficacy of different irrigant activation techniques for cleaning root canal anastomosis
Authors: O. K. Montaser
D. M. Fayyad
N. Abdelsalam
Publication date: 01-12-2023
Publisher: BioMed Central
Published in: BMC Oral Health / Issue 1/2023
Electronic ISSN: 1472-6831
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12903-023-02835-0

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Efficacy of different irrigant activation techniques for cleaning root canal anastomosis

Abstract

Objective

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Clinical relevance

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Objective

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Clinical relevance

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 1/2023

Deep learning-based prediction of osseointegration for dental implant using plain radiography

Detection of the pathological exposure of pulp using an artificial intelligence tool: a multicentric study over periapical radiographs

Accurate mandibular canal segmentation of dental CBCT using a two-stage 3D-UNet based segmentation framework

Trehalose versus carboxymethylcellulose oral spray for relieving radiation-induced xerostomia in head and neck cancer patients: a randomized controlled trial

A novel technique to harvest bone autografts with mild local hyperthermia and enhanced osteogenic bone quality: a preclinical study in dogs

Relationship between bruxism and mandibular bone modifications based on medical imaging: a scoping review