| Article ID | Journal | Published Year | Pages | File Type |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 3167042 | Oral Surgery, Oral Medicine, Oral Pathology, Oral Radiology, and Endodontology | 2011 | 6 Pages |
ObjectiveThe aim of this study was to compare the efficacy of hydrodynamic and ultrasonic-activated irrigation to conventional syringe irrigation in removing dentin debris in straight and curved root canals.Study designTwelve human teeth were selected for study. The root canals of 6 single-rooted premolars with straight canals and 6 molar roots with curved canals were prepared to a size of 45 and split longitudinally. To simulate canal irregularities, 3 standardized holes were cut in 1 canal wall. The canals and holes were then covered with debris. After reassembly, 3 irrigation techniques were compared: syringe irrigation, hydrodynamic irrigation, and ultrasonic irrigation. The amount of debris that remained was evaluated microscopically and graded with a 4-score system.ResultsThe hydrodynamic and ultrasonic irrigation techniques were significantly (P < .001) more efficient as compared with syringe irrigation in both the straight and curved root canals. Ultrasonic irrigation demonstrated a higher efficiency in the straight root canals (P < .01), whereas hydrodynamic irrigation was more efficient in the curved canals (P < .01).ConclusionsIn the straight canals, ultrasonic irrigation was the most effective, but in the curved root canals, hydrodynamic irrigation was superior.
