Policlinic for Operative Dentistry and Periodontology, University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany.
Int Endod J. 2010 May;43(5):363-9. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2591.2009.01675.x.
To determine the efficacy of Sonicare CanalBrush irrigation for root canal cleaning.
Fifty human molar root canals were shaped with sequential NiTi rotary instruments up to size F3 (size 30, 0.09 taper; ProTaper system) and then enlarged apically with a Profile size 40, 0.04 taper. Five different irrigation protocols were tested (n = 10 canals per group) with 2 mL of distilled water (control, group I) or 2.5% NaOCl (control group II and test groups III, IV and V) between instrument size changes. Group III-IV received a final rinse with 17% EDTA for one min. This was extended by 30 s in group IV, whereas group V received this additional 30 s of 17% EDTA sonically dispersed with a Sonicare CanalBrush. For cleanliness evaluations, roots were split longitudinally, examined with scanning electron microscopy and scored according to Hülsmann et al. (1997) for debris and smear layer on the surface of the root canal wall. Walls were assessed at the coronal, middle and apical thirds. Data were analysed with the Kruskal-Wallis and Mann-Whitney tests.
Irrigation with 17% EDTA significantly reduced debris and smear layer scores (P < 0.05) compared to controls. The coronal and middle thirds had lower debris and smear layer scores than the apical third (P < 0.05). In all thirds, sonic agitation of the irrigant with a CanalBrush (group V) resulted in significantly cleaner canal walls compared to all other groups (P < 0.05).
Irrigation by agitation with the Sonicare CanalBrush improved root canal debridement in the coronal, middle and particularly the apical thirds of the root canal.
确定 Sonicare CanalBrush 冲洗在根管清洁中的效果。
对 50 个人类磨牙根管进行连续镍钛旋转器械塑形，直至 F3 尺寸（30 号，0.09 锥度；ProTaper 系统），然后用 Profile 40 号、0.04 锥度的器械进行根尖扩大。测试了五种不同的冲洗方案（每组 10 个根管），在器械尺寸变化之间用 2 毫升蒸馏水（对照组，I 组）或 2.5%次氯酸钠（对照组 II 和测试组 III、IV 和 V）冲洗。组 III-IV 用 17% EDTA 进行终末冲洗 1 分钟。在组 IV 中，冲洗时间延长了 30 秒，而组 V 则用 Sonicare CanalBrush 超声分散 17% EDTA 额外增加 30 秒。为了清洁度评估，将根部分为纵向，用扫描电子显微镜检查，并根据 Hülsmann 等人（1997 年）的标准对根管壁表面的碎屑和玷污层进行评分。评估了根冠、中部和根尖三分之一处的情况。数据采用 Kruskal-Wallis 和 Mann-Whitney 检验进行分析。
与对照组相比，用 17% EDTA 冲洗可显著降低碎屑和玷污层评分（P<0.05）。根冠和中部的碎屑和玷污层评分低于根尖（P<0.05）。在所有三个部位，用 CanalBrush 对冲洗液进行超声搅拌（组 V）的根管壁明显比其他组更清洁（P<0.05）。
用 Sonicare CanalBrush 搅拌冲洗可改善根管冠、中、特别是根尖三分之一处的根管去污效果。
