Keywords
Root canal irrigants
Root canal preparation
Microscopy, electron, scanning
How to Cite
Abstract
Aim: The aim of the study was to evaluate the cleaning of mandibular incisors with WaveOne Gold® (WO) under different preparation techniques. Methods: A total of 210 human mandibular incisors were selected and divided into seven groups (n = 30), prepared by WO single-files (Small 20/.07 – WOS; Primary 25/.07 – WOP; Medium 35/.06 – WOM; or Large 45/.05 - WOL) and sequential-file techniques (WOS to WOP; WOS to WOM; and WOS to WOL). Further subdivision was made according to irrigation protocol: control group (manual irrigation - CON), E1 Irrisonic® - EIR, and EDDY® - EDD. Debris removal and the smear layer were evaluated by scanning electron microscopy. Data were analyzed by using Spearman’s correlation test. The significance level was set at 5%. Results: For debris and smear layer removal, WOS and WOP, EIR differed from CON and EDD (p <0.05). Conclusion: Regardless of the instrumentation used, the agitation of the irrigant solution provided better cleanability. These findings reinforce the need for agitation techniques as adjuvants in cleaning root canal systems in mandibular incisors.
References
Gonçalves LC, Sponchiado Junior EC, da Frota MF, Marques AA, Garcia LF. Morphometrical analysis of cleaning capacity of a hybrid instrumentation in mesial flattened root canals. Aust Endod J. 2011 Dec;37(3):99-104. doi: 10.1111/j.1747-4477.2010.00255.x.
Baumgartner JC, Mader CL. A scanning electron microscopic evaluation of four root canal irrigation regimens. J Endod. 1987 Apr;13(4):147-57. doi: 10.1016/s0099-2399(87)80132-2.
Urban K, Donnermeyer D, Schäfer E, Bürklein S. Canal cleanliness using different irrigation activation systems: a SEM evaluation. Clin Oral Investig. 2017 Dec;21(9):2681-7. doi: 10.1007/s00784-017-2070-x.
Wu MK, R'oris A, Barkis D, Wesselink PR. Prevalence and extent of long oval canals in the apical third. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2000 Jun;89(6):739-43. doi: 10.1067/moe.2000.106344.
Zhao D, Shen Y, Peng B, Haapasalo M. Micro-computed tomography evaluation of the preparation of mesiobuccal root canals in maxillary first molars with Hyflex CM, Twisted Files, and K3 instruments. J Endod. 2013 Mar;39(3):385-8. doi: 10.1016/j.joen.2012.11.030.
Lorencetti KT, Silva-Sousa YTC, Nascimento GED, Messias DCF, Colucci V, Rached-Junior FA, et al. Influence of apical enlargement in cleaning of curved canals using negative pressure system. Braz Dent J. 2014;25(5):430-4. doi: 10.1590/0103-6440201302435.
Rodrigues RCV, Zandi H, Kristoffersen AK, Enersen M, Mdala I, Ørstavik D, et al. Influence of the apical preparation size and the irrigant type on bacterial reduction in root canal-treated teeth with apical periodontitis. J Endod. 2017 Jul;43(7):1058-63. doi: 10.1016/j.joen.2017.02.004.
Yared G. Canal preparation using only one Ni-Ti rotary instrument: preliminary observations. Int Endod J. 2008 Apr;41(4):339-44. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2591.2007.01351.x.
Vasconcelos LRSM, Midena RZ, Minotti PG, Pereira TC, Duarte MAH, Andrade FB. Effect of ultrasound streaming on the disinfection of flattened root canals prepared by rotary and reciprocating systems. J Appl Oral Sci. 2017;25(5):477-82. doi: 10.1590/1678-7757-2016-0358.
Vera J, Siqueira JF Jr, Ricucci D, Loghin S, Fernández N, Flores B, et al. One- versus two-visit endodontic treatment of teeth with apical periodontitis: a histobacteriologic study. J Endod. 2012 Aug;38(8):1040-52. doi: 10.1016/j.joen.2012.04.010.
Plotino G, Pameijer CH, Grande NM, Somma F. Ultrasonics in endodontics: a review of the literature. J Endod. 2007 Feb;33(2):81-95. doi: 10.1016/j.joen.2006.10.008.
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 Jun;75(6):781-90. doi: 10.1002/jemt.21125.
Plotino G, Özyürek T, Grande NM, Gündoğar M. Influence of size and taper of basic root canal preparation on root canal cleanliness: a scanning electron microscopy study. Int Endod J. 2019 Mar;52(3):343-51. doi: 10.1111/iej.13002.
Duque JA, Duarte MA, Canali LC, Zancan RF, Vivan RR, Bernardes RA, et al. Comparative effectiveness of new mechanical irrigant agitating devices for debris 2017 Feb;43(2):326-31. doi: 10.1016/j.joen.2016.10.009.
Versiani MA, Carvalho KKT, Mazzi-Chaves JF, Sousa-Neto MD.. Micro-computed tomographic evaluation of the shaping ability of XP-endo Shaper, iRaCe, and EdgeFile systems in long oval-shaped canals. J Endod. 2018 Mar;44(3):489-95. doi: 10.1016/j.joen.2017.09.008.
Van der Vyver PJ, Vorster M. WaveOne®️ Gold reciprocating instruments: clinical application in the private practice: Part 1. Int Dent – Afr Ed. 2017;7(4):6-19.
Gutmann J, Saunders W, Nguyen L, Guo I, Saunders E. Ultrasonic root‐end preparation Part 1. SEM analysis. Int Endod J. 1994 Nov;27(6):318-24. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2591.1994.tb00276.x.
Prada I, Micó-Muñoz P, Giner-Lluesma T, Micó-Martínez P, Collado-Castellano N, Manzano-Saiz A. Influence of microbiology on endodontic failure. Literature review. Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal. 2019 May 1;24(3):e364-72. doi: 10.4317/medoral.22907.
Khalap ND, Kokate S, Hegde V. Ultrasonic versus sonic activation of the final irrigant in root canals instrumented with rotary/reciprocating files: An in-vitro scanning electron microscopy analysis. J Conserv Dent. 2016;19(4):368-72. doi: 10.4103/0972-0707.186451.
Sousa-Neto MD, Silva-Sousa YC, Mazzi-Chaves JF, Carvalho KKT, Barbosa AFS, Versiani MA, et al. Root canal preparation using micro-computed tomography analysis: a literature review. Braz Oral Res. 2018 Oct 18;32(suppl 1):e66. doi: 10.1590/1807-3107bor-2018.vol32.0066.
Alakshar A, Saleh ARM, Gorduysus MO. Debris and smear layer removal from oval root canals comparing XP-Endo finisher, EndoActivator, and manual Irrigation: A SEM evaluation. Eur J Dent. 2020 Oct;14(4):626-33. doi: 10.1055/s-0040-1714762.
De-Deus G, Barino B, Zamolyi RQ, Souza E, Fonseca Jr A, Fidel S, et al. Suboptimal debridement quality produced by the single-file F2 ProTaper technique in oval-shaped canals. J Endod. 2010 Nov;36(11):1897-900. doi: 10.1016/j.joen.2010.08.009.
Saraf AA, Patil AC, Mangala TM, Mahaparale R, Mali S, Pawar S. Comparison of cleaning effectiveness of single rotary file OneShape and reciprocating F2 Protaper with Protaper Universal sequence: A SEM analysis. J Oral Biol Craniofac Res. 2020;10(4):337-42. doi: 10.1016/j.jobcr.2020.06.011.
Hülsmann M, Rümmelin C, Schäfers F. Root canal cleanliness after preparation with different endodontic handpieces and hand instruments: a comparative SEM investigation. J Endod. 1997 May;23(5):301-6. doi: 10.1016/S0099-2399(97)80410-4.
de Gregorio C, Arias A, Navarette N, Del Rio V, Oltra E, Cohenca N. Effect of apical size and taper on the volume of irrigant delivered at working length with apical pressure at different root curvatures. J Endod. 2013 Jan;39(1):119-24. doi: 10.1016/j.joen.2012.10.008.
van der Sluis LW, Gambarini G, Wu MK, Wesselink PR. The influence of volume, type of irrigant and flushing method on removing artificially placed dentine debris from the apical root canal during passive ultrasonic irrigation. Int Endod J. 2006 Jun;39(6):472-6. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2591.2006.01108.x.
Rath PP, Yiu CKY, Matinlinna JP, Kishen A, Neelakantan P. The effect of root canal irrigants on dentin: a focused review. Restor Dent Endod. 2020 Jun 30;45(3):e39. doi: 10.5395/rde.2020.45.e39.
Garberoglio R, Becce C. Smear layer removal by root canal irrigants. A comparative scanning electron microscopic study. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol. 1994 Sep;78(3):359-67. doi: 10.1016/0030-4220(94)90069-8.
Tay FR, Gu LS, Schoeffel GJ, Wimmer C, Susin L, Zhang K, et al. Effect of vapor lock on root canal debridement by using a side-vented needle for positive-pressure irrigant delivery. J Endod. 2010 Apr;36(4):745-50. doi: 10.1016/j.joen.2009.11.022.
Espir CG, Nascimento-Mendes CA, Guerreiro-Tanomaru JM, Cavenago BC, Hungaro Duarte MA, Tanomaru-Filho M. Shaping ability of rotary or reciprocating systems for oval root canal preparation: a micro-computed tomography study. Clin Oral Investig. 2018 Dec;22(9):3189-94. doi: 10.1007/s00784-018-2411-4.
Căpută PE, Retsas A, Kuijk L, de Paz LEC, Boutsioukis C. Ultrasonic irrigant activation during root canal treatment: a systematic review. J Endod. 2019 Jan;45(1):31-44.e13. doi: 10.1016/j.joen.2018.09.010.
Aveiro E, Chiarelli-Neto VM, de-Jesus-Soares A, Zaia AA, Ferraz CCR, Almeida JFA, et al. Efficacy of reciprocating and ultrasonic activation of 6% sodium hypochlorite in the reduction of microbial content and virulence factors in teeth with primary endodontic infection. Int Endod J. 2020 May;53(5):604-18. doi: 10.1111/iej.13261.
Hage W, De Moor RJG, Hajj D, Sfeir G, Sarkis DK, Zogheib C. Impact of different irrigant agitation methods on bacterial elimination from infected root canals. Dent J (Basel). 2019 Jun 27;7(3):64. doi: 10.3390/dj7030064.
Zeng C, Willison J, Meghil MM, Bergeron BE, Cutler CW, Tay FR, et al. Antibacterial efficacy of an endodontic sonic-powered irrigation system: An in vitro study. J Dent. 2018 Aug;75:105-12. doi: 10.1016/j.jdent.2018.06.003.
Ahmad M, Pitt Ford TJ, Crum LA. Ultrasonic debridement of root canals: acoustic streaming and its possible role. J Endod. 1987 Oct;13(10):490-9. doi: 10.1016/s0099-2399(87)80016-x.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Copyright (c) 2021 Prescila Mota de Oliveira Kublitski, Flávia Sens Fagundes Tomazinho, Bruno Marques-da-Silva, Vinícius Rodrigues dos Santos, Wander José da Silva, Flares Baratto-Filho, Marilisa Carneiro Leão Gabardo
Downloads
