Abstract：
OBJECTIVE: The aim of the current study was to evaluate the penetration depth and smear layer removal of root canal irrigant using various irrigation activation techniques.
METHODS: In this investigation, sixty single-rooted premolars extracted for orthodontic purposes were chosen. Diamond burs were used to create an access cavity, and #10 K-file was used to determine the patency. About sixty samples were divided into the following three groups (20 samples in each group), group I: Irrigation with conventional needle, group II: Activation of EndoVac system, group III: Passive ultrasonic irrigation (PUI). The efficacy of the smear layer was assessed using a scanning electron microscopy at a ×2000 magnification. One-way ANOVA was used to record and analyze the data. All statistical analyses were performed with a significance level of p < 0.05.
RESULTS: At coronal third, the maximum smear layer was removed in group II (1.26 ± 0.02) followed by group III (1.84 ± 0.16) and group I (2.89 ± 0.21). At middle third, smear layer removal was maximum in group I (1.18 ± 0.10) followed by group III (1.72 ± 0.09) and group I (2.66 ± 0.18). At apical third, the more smear layer was removed in group II (1.02 ± 0.01) followed by group III (1.58 ± 0.08) and group I (2.38 ± 0.06). There was a highly significant difference found between the three different irrigation systems at all three levels (p < 0.001).
CONCLUSIONS: In conclusion, every irrigation device that was evaluated was successful in removing the smear layer from the root canal. However, the EndoVac system group removed a greater amount of smear layer compared with PUI and conventional needle group.
CONCLUSIONS: With the goal of promoting cleaning that is beyond the ability of mechanical devices, irrigation is a crucial part of root canal therapy. If an efficient irrigation delivery system is used, the irrigants can reach the working length (WL). This type of distribution system needs to provide a suitable amount of irrigants up to the WL, as well as have enough flow and be effective at debriding the entire canal system. How to cite this article: Pujari MD, Das M, Das A, et al. Assessment of Smear Layer Removal and Penetration Depth of Root Canal Irrigant Using Different Irrigation Activation Systems: A Comparative Study. J Contemp Dent Pract 2024;25(4):331-334.
METHODS: In this investigation, sixty single-rooted premolars extracted for orthodontic purposes were chosen. Diamond burs were used to create an access cavity, and #10 K-file was used to determine the patency. About sixty samples were divided into the following three groups (20 samples in each group), group I: Irrigation with conventional needle, group II: Activation of EndoVac system, group III: Passive ultrasonic irrigation (PUI). The efficacy of the smear layer was assessed using a scanning electron microscopy at a ×2000 magnification. One-way ANOVA was used to record and analyze the data. All statistical analyses were performed with a significance level of p < 0.05.
RESULTS: At coronal third, the maximum smear layer was removed in group II (1.26 ± 0.02) followed by group III (1.84 ± 0.16) and group I (2.89 ± 0.21). At middle third, smear layer removal was maximum in group I (1.18 ± 0.10) followed by group III (1.72 ± 0.09) and group I (2.66 ± 0.18). At apical third, the more smear layer was removed in group II (1.02 ± 0.01) followed by group III (1.58 ± 0.08) and group I (2.38 ± 0.06). There was a highly significant difference found between the three different irrigation systems at all three levels (p < 0.001).
CONCLUSIONS: In conclusion, every irrigation device that was evaluated was successful in removing the smear layer from the root canal. However, the EndoVac system group removed a greater amount of smear layer compared with PUI and conventional needle group.
CONCLUSIONS: With the goal of promoting cleaning that is beyond the ability of mechanical devices, irrigation is a crucial part of root canal therapy. If an efficient irrigation delivery system is used, the irrigants can reach the working length (WL). This type of distribution system needs to provide a suitable amount of irrigants up to the WL, as well as have enough flow and be effective at debriding the entire canal system. How to cite this article: Pujari MD, Das M, Das A, et al. Assessment of Smear Layer Removal and Penetration Depth of Root Canal Irrigant Using Different Irrigation Activation Systems: A Comparative Study. J Contemp Dent Pract 2024;25(4):331-334.
摘要：
目的：本研究的目的是使用各种冲洗激活技术评估根管冲洗液的穿透深度和涂抹层去除。
方法：在这项调查中，选择了60颗用于正畸目的的单根前磨牙。钻石毛刺被用来制造一个进入腔，和#10K文件用于确定通畅性。将约60个样本分为以下三组（每组20个样本），第一组：用常规针头冲洗，第二组：EndoVac系统的激活，第三组:被动超声冲洗(PUI)。使用扫描电子显微镜在X2000放大倍数下评估涂片层的功效。单因素方差分析用于记录和分析数据。所有统计分析均以p<0.05的显著性水平进行。
结果：在日冕第三，最大涂片层在II组（1.26±0.02）中被去除，其次是III组（1.84±0.16）和I组（2.89±0.21）。在中间三分之一，I组（1.18±0.10），其次是III组（1.72±0.09）和I组（2.66±0.18）。在顶端第三，Ⅱ组（1.02±0.01），其次是Ⅲ组（1.58±0.08）和Ⅰ组（2.38±0.06）。在所有三个水平上，三种不同的灌溉系统之间存在非常显着的差异（p<0.001）。
结论：结论：评估的每个冲洗装置都成功地从根管中去除涂抹层。然而,与PUI和常规针组相比，EndoVac系统组去除了更多的涂片层。
结论：为了促进超越机械设备能力的清洁，冲洗是根管治疗的关键部分。如果使用高效的灌溉输送系统，灌水可以达到工作长度（WL）。这种类型的分配系统需要提供适量的灌溉直到WL，以及有足够的流量和有效的清创整个运河系统。如何引用这篇文章：PujariMD，DasM,DasA,etal.使用不同灌溉激活系统评估根管冲洗液的涂抹层去除和渗透深度：比较研究。JContempDentPract2024；25(4)：331-334。
方法：在这项调查中，选择了60颗用于正畸目的的单根前磨牙。钻石毛刺被用来制造一个进入腔，和#10K文件用于确定通畅性。将约60个样本分为以下三组（每组20个样本），第一组：用常规针头冲洗，第二组：EndoVac系统的激活，第三组:被动超声冲洗(PUI)。使用扫描电子显微镜在X2000放大倍数下评估涂片层的功效。单因素方差分析用于记录和分析数据。所有统计分析均以p<0.05的显著性水平进行。
结果：在日冕第三，最大涂片层在II组（1.26±0.02）中被去除，其次是III组（1.84±0.16）和I组（2.89±0.21）。在中间三分之一，I组（1.18±0.10），其次是III组（1.72±0.09）和I组（2.66±0.18）。在顶端第三，Ⅱ组（1.02±0.01），其次是Ⅲ组（1.58±0.08）和Ⅰ组（2.38±0.06）。在所有三个水平上，三种不同的灌溉系统之间存在非常显着的差异（p<0.001）。
结论：结论：评估的每个冲洗装置都成功地从根管中去除涂抹层。然而,与PUI和常规针组相比，EndoVac系统组去除了更多的涂片层。
结论：为了促进超越机械设备能力的清洁，冲洗是根管治疗的关键部分。如果使用高效的灌溉输送系统，灌水可以达到工作长度（WL）。这种类型的分配系统需要提供适量的灌溉直到WL，以及有足够的流量和有效的清创整个运河系统。如何引用这篇文章：PujariMD，DasM,DasA,etal.使用不同灌溉激活系统评估根管冲洗液的涂抹层去除和渗透深度：比较研究。JContempDentPract2024；25(4)：331-334。
