Debris removal from artificial grooves using different endodontic irrigation activation techniques: ex vivo

Yıl 2017, Cilt: 34 Sayı: 1, 14 - 18, 02.01.2017

Mügem Aslı Ekici Bağdagül Helvacıoğlu Kıvanç Adil Ekici Özgür Uzun

https://doi.org/10.17214/gaziaot.273922

Cited By: 1

Öz

Objective: The aim of this study was to compare the debris removal efficiency of different irrigation activation techniques from artificially formed endodontic grooves.

Materials and Method: Crowns of twenty maxillary incisor teeth were removed and the root canals were prepared. Specimens were embedded in acrylic resin and placed into teflon molds. Acrylic resin blocks were removed from the molds and split longitudinally into equal two halves. A standardized artificial groove (4 mm x 0.2 mm x 0.5 mm) was prepared at 2 mm distance from the apex and filled with dentinal debris. Acrylic resin blocks were placed into the teflon mold again and compressed. Four different irrigation activation techniques; Manual Dynamic Irrigation (MDI), Passive Ultrasonic Irrigation (PUI), Sonic Irrigation (SI) and Apical Negative Pressure Irrigation (ANPI) were used for debris removal. Conventional Irrigation (CI) was applied as control. For standardization, each specimen was cleaned and reused (n=20). Before and after irrigation, images of the grooves were taken by using an operating microscope at x30 magnification. Amount of remaining debris was evaluated by using a scoring system. Data were analyzed by using Kruskall-Wallis and Mann-Whitney U tests (α=0.05).

Results: There were statistically significant differences between the experimental groups (p<0.05). PUI (0.85±0.41) was found to be the most effective technique; whereas CI (2.30±1.03)  was found to be the least effective technique for debris removal (p<0.05). There was no statistically significant difference between groups CI and SI, MDI and PUI, MDI and ANPI, and SI ve ANPI (p>0.05).

Conclusion: PUI yielded the lowest debris scores. A simple and low-cost technique, MDI, yielded similar results with PUI.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Endodontics, root canal therapy, sodium hypochlorite

Farklı endodontik irrigasyon aktivasyon teknikleri kullanılarak yapay oluklardan debriz uzaklaştırılması: ex vivo

Öz

Amaç: Bu çalışmanın amacı, farklı irrigasyon aktivasyon tekniklerinin kök kanallarında oluşturulan yapay oluklardan debriz uzaklaştırma etkinliklerinin karşılaştırılmasıdır.

Gereç ve Yöntem: Yirmi adet üst keser dişin kronları uzaklaştırıldıktan sonra kök kanal preparasyonunu yapıldı. Örnekler, akrilik rezin kullanılarak vidalı teflon kalıplara gömüldü. Akrilik rezin bloklar kalıptan çıkarıldı ve kesme cihazı yardımıyla iki eşit parçaya ayrıldı. Parçaların sadece bir yarısında apikalden 2 mm uzaklıkta yapay standart oluk (4 mm x 0.2 mm x 0.5 mm) hazırlandı ve içi dentin debrizi ile dolduruldu. Akrilik rezin bloklar tekrar teflon kalıp içerisine yerleştirildi ve kalıp sıkıştırıldı. Debriz uzaklaştırılmasında dört farklı irrigasyon aktivasyon tekniği kullanıldı: Manuel Dinamik İrrigasyon (MDİ), Sonik İrrigasyon (Sİ), Apikal Negatif Basınçlı İrrigasyon (ANBİ) ve Pasif Ultrasonik İrrigasyon (PUİ). Kontrol grubunda Konvansiyonel Şırınga İrrigasyonu (Kİ) uygulandı. Standardizasyonun sağlanması için her örnek temizlenip tekrar kullanıldı (n= 20). İrrigasyon öncesi ve sonrası olukların görüntüleri x30 büyütmede operasyon mikroskopu yardımıyla alındı; oluklarda kalan debriz miktarı skorlama yapılarak değerlendirildi. Elde edilen bilgiler Kruskall-Wallis ve Mann-Whitney U testleri ile analiz edildi (α=0.05).

Bulgular: Çalışma grupları arasında istatistiksel olarak anlamlı farklılıklar gözlendi (p<0.05). Dentin debrizini en etkili uzaklaştıran grup PUİ (0.85±0.41) bulunurken, en az uzaklaştıran grup Kİ (2.30±1.03) olarak bulundu (p<0.05). Kİ ve Sİ, MDİ ve PUİ, MDİ ve ANBİ ve Sİ ve ANBİ arasında istatistiksel olarak anlamlı fark yoktu (p>0.05).

Sonuç: Basit ve ucuz bir teknik olan MDİ, düşük debriz skorları elde edilen PUİ ile benzer sonuçlar gösterdi.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Endodonti, kök kanal tedavisi, sodium hipoklorit

Kaynakça

• Mamootil K, Messer HH. Penetration of dentinal tubules by endodontic sealer cements in extracted teeth and in vivo. Int Endod J 2007;40:873-81.
• Peters LB, Wesselink PR. Periapical healing of endodontically treated teeth in one and two visits obturated in the presence or absence of detectable microorganisms. Int Endod J 2002;35:660-7.
• Caron G, Nham K, Bronnec F, Machtou P. Effectiveness of different final irrigant activation protocols on smear layer removal in curved canals. J Endod 2010;36:1361-6.
• Peters OA. Current challenges and concepts in the preparation of root canal systems: a review. J Endod 2004;30:559-67.
• Wu MK, Wesselink PR. A primary observation on the preparation and obturation of oval canals. Int Endod J 2001;34:137-41.
• McGill S, Gulabivala K, Mordan N, Ng YL. The efficacy of dynamic irrigation using a commercially available system (RinsEndo) determined by removal of a collagen ‘biomolecular film’ from an ex vivo model. Int Endod J 2008;41:602-8.
• Ahmad M, Roy RA, Kamarudin AG. Observations of acoustic streaming fields around an oscillating ultrasonic file. Endod Dent Traumatol 1992;8:189-94.
• Saber Sel-D, Hashem AA. Efficacy of different final irrigation activation techniques on smear layer removal. J Endod 2011;37:1272-5.
• Bolles JA, He J, Svoboda KK, Schneiderman E, Glickman GN. Comparison of Vibringe, EndoActivator, and needle irrigation on sealer penetration in extracted human teeth. J Endod 2013;39:708-11.
• Schoeffel GJ. The EndoVac method of endodontic irrigation: part 2-efficacy. Dent Today 2008;27:82-7.
• Nielsen BA, Craig Baumgartner J. Comparison of the EndoVac system to needle irrigation of root canals. J Endod 2007;33:611-5.
• Lee SJ, Wu MK, Wesselink PR. The effectiveness of syringe irrigation and ultrasonics to remove debris from simulated irregularities within prepared root canal walls. Int Endod J 2004;37:672-8.
• van der Sluis LW, Wu MK, Wesselink PR. The evaluation of removal of calcium hydroxide paste from an artificial standardized groove in the apical root canal using different irrigation methodologies. Int Endod J 2007;40:52-7.
• van der Sluis LW, Wu MK, Wesselink PR. The efficacy of ultrasonic irrigation to remove artificially placed dentine debris from human root canals prepared using instruments of varying taper. Int Endod J 2005;38:764-8.
• van der Sluis LW, Wu MK, Wesselink PR. A comparison between a smooth wire and a K-file in removing artificially placed dentine debris from root canals in resin blocks during ultrasonic irrigation. Int Endod J 2005;38:593-6.
• Rödig T, Bozkurt M, Konietschke F, Hülsmann M. Comparison of the Vibringe system with syringe and passive ultrasonic irrigation in removing debris from simulated root canal irregularities. J Endod 2010;36:1410-13.
• Jiang LM, Verhaagen B, Versluis M, van der Sluis LW. Evaluation of a sonic device designed to activate irrigant in the root canal. J Endod 2010;36:143-6.
• Ribeiro EM, Silva-Sousa YT, Souza Gabriel AE, Sousa-Neto MD, Lorencetti KT, Silva SR. Debris and smear removal in flattened root canals after use of different irrigant agitation protocols. Microsc Res Tech 2012;75:781-90.
• Passarinho-Neto JG, Marchesan MA, Ferreira RB, Silva RG, Silva-Sousa YT, Sousa-Neto MD. In vitro evaluation of endodontic debris removal as obtained by rotary instrumentation coupled with ultrasonic irrigation. Aust Endod J 2006;32:123-8.
• Cheung GS, Stock CJ. In vitro cleaning ability of root canal irrigants with and without endosonics. Int Endod J 1993;26:334-43.
• Rödig T, Sedghi M, Konietschke F, Lange K, Zieboiz D, Hülsmann M. Efficacy of syringe irrigation, RinsEndo and passive ultrasonic irrigation in removing debris from irregularities in root canals with different apical sizes. Int Endod J 2010;43:581-9.
• Mancini M, Cerroni L, Iorio L, Armellin E, Conte G, Cianconi L. Smear layer removal and canal cleanliness using different irrigation systems (EndoActivator, EndoVAC and passive ultrasonic irrigation): field emission scanning electron microscopic evaluation in an in vitro study. J Endod 2013;39:1456-60.
• Bronnec F, Bouillaguet S, Machtou P. Ex vivo assessment of irrigant penetration and renewal during the final irrigation regimen. Int Endod J 2010;43: 663-72.
• Susin L, Liu Y, Yoon JC, Parente JM, Loushine RJ, Riccucci D, et al. Canal and isthmus debridement efficacies of two irrigant agitation techniques in a closed system. Int Endod 2010;43:1077-90.
• Parente JM, Loushine RJ, Susin L, Gu L, Looney SW, Weller RN, et al. Root canal debridement using manual dynamic agitation or the EndoVac for final irrigation in a closed system and an open system. Int Endod J 2010;43:1001-12.
• Gade VJ, Sedani SK, Lokade JS, Belsare LD, Gade JR. Comparative evaluation of debris removal from root canal wall by using EndoVAC and conventional needle irrigaton: An in vitro study. Contemp Clin Dent 2013;4:432-6.
• Saini M, Kumari M, Taneja S. Comparative evaluation of the efficacy of three different irrigation devices in removal of debris from root canal at different levels: An in vitro study. J Conserv Dent 2013;16:509-13.
• de Gregorio C, Estevez R, Cisneros R, Paranjpe A, Cohenca N. Efficacy of different irrigation and activation systems on the penetration of sodium hypochlorite into simulated lateral canals and up to working lenght: an in vitro study. J Endod 2010;36:1216-21.
• Pashley EL, Birdsong NL, Bowman K, Pashley DH. Cytotoxic effects of NaOCl on vital tissue. J Endod 1985;11:525-8.
• Johnson M, Sidow SJ, Looney SW, Lindsey K, Niu LN, Tay FR. Canal and isthmus debridement efficacy using a sonic irrigation technique in a closed-canal system. J Endod 2012;38:1265-8.