Dhaimy Said, Imdary Sara, Dhoum Sara, Benkiran Imane, El Ouazzani Amal
School of Dentistry of Casablanca, Abou Al Alaa Zahar Street 21100, Mers Sultan, Casablanca, Morocco.
Int J Dent. 2016;2016:3142742. doi: 10.1155/2016/3142742. Epub 2016 Jun 28.
Introduction. This experimental study is to compare radiographs based on the penetration depth of the irrigant following three final irrigation techniques. Material and Method. A sample of sixty teeth with single roots were prepared with stainless steel K files followed by mechanized Ni-Ti files iRace® under irrigation with 2.5% sodium hypochlorite. Radiopaque solution was utilized to measure the penetration depth of the irrigant. Three irrigation techniques were performed during this study: (i) passive irrigation, (ii) manually activated irrigation, and (iii) passive irrigation with an endodontic needle CANAL CLEAN®. Radiographs were performed to measure the length of irrigant penetration in each technique. Results. In comparison, passive irrigation with a conventional syringe showed infiltration of the irrigant by an average of 0.682 ± 0.105, whereas the manually activated irrigation technique indicated an average of 0.876 ± 0.066 infiltration. Irrigation with an endodontic syringe showed an average infiltration of 0.910 ± 0.043. The results revealed highly significant difference between the three irrigation techniques (α = 5%). Conclusion. Adding manual activation to the irrigant improved the result by 20%. This study indicates that passive irrigation with an endodontic needle has proved to be the most effective irrigation technique of the canal system.
引言。本实验研究旨在比较三种最终冲洗技术后冲洗液的渗透深度的X线片。材料与方法。选取60颗单根牙样本,先用不锈钢K锉预备,然后在2.5%次氯酸钠冲洗下,使用iRace®机械镍钛锉进行预备。使用不透射线溶液测量冲洗液的渗透深度。本研究期间进行了三种冲洗技术:(i)被动冲洗,(ii)手动激活冲洗,以及(iii)使用CANAL CLEAN®根管针进行被动冲洗。拍摄X线片以测量每种技术中冲洗液的渗透长度。结果。相比之下,使用传统注射器进行被动冲洗时,冲洗液的平均渗透深度为0.682±0.105,而手动激活冲洗技术的平均渗透深度为0.876±0.066。使用根管注射器冲洗的平均渗透深度为0.910±0.043。结果显示三种冲洗技术之间存在高度显著差异(α = 5%)。结论。对冲洗液进行手动激活可使效果提高20%。本研究表明,使用根管针进行被动冲洗已被证明是根管系统最有效的冲洗技术。