Apical Extrusion of Debris and Irrigant Using XP-Endo Finisher, EndoActivator, Passive Ultrasonic Irrigation or Syringe Irrigation

Year 2018, Volume: 19 Issue: 2, 127 - 131, 31.08.2018

Evren Sarıyılmaz Cangül Keskin

https://doi.org/10.4274/meandros.24008

Cited By: 8

Abstract

Objective: Extrusion of irrigant and debris into the periapical tissues is a potential risk for flare-ups during root canal treatment. The aim of this study was to evaluate the apically extruded debris and sodium hypochlorite during XP-Endo Finisher (XP-Endo) file use and compare with final irrigation techniques. The tested null hypothesis in this study was that there was no difference among the irrigation techniques.
Materials and Methods: An agar gel model was prepared for 80 extracted single rooted human mandibular premolar teeth, which were prepared up to the apical size of #40. The samples were divided into four groups according to the final irrigation regime: conventional syringe irrigation, XP-Endo, passive ultrasonic irrigation (PUI), and EndoActivator (EA). The test apparatus was weighed before and after the experiment, and the amount of apically extruded debris and irrigant was calculated.
Results: There was minimal irrigant and debris extrusion in all groups. No significant difference among the tested groups was detected (p>0.05).
Conclusion: Using the PUI, XP-Endo file, or EA according to the manufacturers’ instruction does not increase the extrusion risk.

Keywords

XP-Endo Finisher , passive ultrasonic irrigation , sonic irrigation , apical extrusion

References

• 1. Van Der Sluis LW, Verhaagen B, Macedo R, Versluis M. The role of irrigation in endodontics. In: Giovanni Olivi, Roeland De Moor, Enrico DiVito. Lasers in Endodontics. Switzerland: Springer International Publishing, 2016; 45-69.
• 2. Seltzer S, Naidorf IJ. Flare-ups in endodontics: I. Etiological factors. J Endod 1985; 11: 472-8.
• 3. Seltzer S, Naidorf IJ. Flare-ups in endodontics: II. Therapeutic measures. J Endod 1985; 11: 559-67.
• 4. Desai P, Himel V. Comparative safety of various intracanal irrigation systems. J Endod 2009; 35: 545-9.
• 5. Uroz-Torres D, González-Rodríguez MP, Ferrer-Luque CM. Effectiveness of the EndoActivator System in removing the smear layer after root canal instrumentation. J Endod 2010; 36: 308-11.
• 6. Ruddle CJ. Endodontic disinfection: tsunami irrigation. Endodontic Practice 2008; 11: 7-15.
• 7. Leoni GB, Versiani MA, Silva-Sousa YT, Bruniera JF, Pécora JD, Sousa-Neto MD. Ex vivo evaluation of four final irrigation protocols on the removal of hard-tissue debris from the mesial root canal system of mandibular first molars. Int Endod J 2016; 50: 398-406.
• 8. Elnaghy AM, Mandorah A, Elsaka SE. Effectiveness of XP-endo Finisher, EndoActivator, and File agitation on debris and smear layer removal in curved root canals: a comparative study. Odontology 2017; 105: 178-83.
• 9. Myers GL, Montgomery S. A comparison of weights of debris extruded apically by conventional filing and Canal Master techniques. J Endod 1991; 17: 275-9.
• 10. Üstün Y, Çanakçi BC, Dinçer AN, Er O, Düzgün S. Evaluation of apically extruded debris associated with several Ni-Ti systems. Int Endod J 2015; 48: 701-4.
• 11. Lu Y, Wang R, Zhang L, Li HL, Zheng QH, Zhou XD, et al. Apically extruded debris and irrigant with two Ni-Ti systems and hand files when removing root fillings: a laboratory study. Int Endod J 2013; 46: 1125-30.
• 12. Schneider SW. A comparison of canal preparations in straight and curved root canals. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol 1971; 32: 271-5.
• 13. Ram Z. Effectiveness of root canal irrigation. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol 1977; 44: 306-12.
• 14. 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.
• 15. Haapasalo M, Shen Y, Wang Z, Gao Y. Irrigation in endodontics. Br Dent J 2014; 216: 299-303.
• 16. Gu LS, Kim JR, Ling J, Choi KK, Pashley DH, Tay FR. Review of contemporary irrigant agitation techniques and devices. J Endod 2009; 35: 791-804.
• 17. Van der Sluis LW, Versluis M, Wu MK, Wesselink PR. Passive ultrasonic irrigation of the root canal: a review of the literature. Int Endod J 2007; 40: 415-26.
• 18. Walmsley AD, Lumley PJ, Laird WR. Oscillatory pattern of sonically powered endodontic files. Int Endod J 1989; 22: 125-32.
• 19. Rodríguez-Figueroa C, McClanahan SB, Bowles WR. Spectrophotometric determination of irrigant extrusion using passive ultrasonic irrigation, EndoActivator, or syringe irrigation. J Endod 2014; 40: 1622-6.
• 20. Altundasar E, Nagas E, Uyanik O, Serper A. Debris and irrigant extrusion potential of 2 rotary systems and irrigation needles. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 2011; 112: e31-5.
• 21. Iqbal M, Kurtz E, Kohli M. Incidence and factors related to flare-ups in a graduate endodontic programme. Int Endod J 2009; 42: 99-104.
• 22. Topçuoğlu HS, Aktı A, Tuncay Ö, Dinçer AN, Düzgün S, Topçuoğlu G. Evaluation of debris extruded apically during the removal of root canal filling material using ProTaper, D-RaCe, and R-Endo rotary nickel-titanium retreatment instruments and hand files. J Endod 2014; 40: 2066-9.
• 23. Çanakçi BC, Er O, Dincer A. Do the sealer solvents used affect apically extruded debris in retreatment? J Endod 2015; 41: 1507-9.
• 24. Tanalp J, Güngör T. Apical extrusion of debris: a literature review of an inherent occurrence during root canal treatment. Int Endod J 2014; 47: 211-21.