A Comparative Evaluation of the Cleaning Efficacy of Five Different Root Canal Irrigation Devices: A Histological Study
European Journal of Dentistry, ISSN: 1305-7464, Vol: 18, Issue: 3, Page: 827-833
2023
- 1Citations
- 15Captures
Metric Options: Counts1 Year3 YearSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Article Description
Objectives This study is aimed to evaluate the cleaning efficacy of five different irrigation systems as SonicMax, RinsEndo, EndoVac, passive ultrasonic irrigation (PUI), and manual needle irrigation (MNI) to histologically evaluate the presence of organic structures and the penetration of irrigation solution. Materials and Methods Forty-two single-rooted, extracted human mandibular premolars were used in the study. Each tooth was decoronated at the cementoenamel junction and the root canals were instrumented using ProTaper rotary instruments in a crown-down manner. The specimens were randomly divided into five experimental groups (n = 7) Group (1) SonicMax, group (2) RinsEndo,group (3) EndoVac, group (4) PUI, group (5) MNI, and the control groups (n = 7). Each system used 2.5% sodium hypochlorite (NaOCl), 17% ethylenediamine tetraacetic acid (EDTA), and 2.5% NaOCl, respectively, in the experimental groups. The control group did not receive any final irrigation. The measurements were analyzed by employing two-way analysis of variance multivariate results to show significant differences between the length of the dentin tubules in the apical, middle, and coronal of the six groups. The post-hoc test was used when groups were compared by pairs. Results The results of this study indicate that among the five groups, the RinsEndo and EndoVac were found to be most effective in the cleaning of root canals. The RinsEndo shows highly significant results in the cleaning efficiency of the coronal and middle parts compared with the other groups. The cleaning efficiency in the apical area was the same for RinsEndo and EndoVac. Conclusion The result of our study indicates that RinsEndo and EndoVac may be more effective in clinical practice.
Bibliographic Details
http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=85179436477&origin=inward; http://dx.doi.org/10.1055/s-0043-1774325; http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37995725; http://www.thieme-connect.de/DOI/DOI?10.1055/s-0043-1774325; https://dx.doi.org/10.1055/s-0043-1774325; https://www.thieme-connect.de/products/ejournals/abstract/10.1055/s-0043-1774325
Georg Thieme Verlag KG
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know