Karade Priyatam, Johnson Alexander, Baeten John, Chopade Rutuja, Hoshing Upendra
Assistant Professor, Department of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, Vasantdada Patil Dental College and Hospital, Kavalapur, Sangli, India.
Senior Product Development Engineer, Inter-Med, Inc., Racine, Wisconsin.
Compend Contin Educ Dent. 2018 Apr;39(4):e9-e12.
This study evaluated intracanal smear layer removal using syringe and needle irrigation (ie, conventional irrigation [CI]) with and without adjunctive activation using EndoActivator® or EndoUltra®.
Thirty-five premolars were divided into three experimental groups (n = 10) and a control (n = 5): (1) CI, (2) CI plus sonic activation (EndoActivator), (3) CI plus ultrasonic activation (EndoUltra), or (4) CI using saline. All teeth were prepared to a size #40 K file. Following irrigation, the teeth were split and imaged using scanning electron microscopy (SEM). SEM images were evaluated by: (1) blinded researchers who provided a smear layer score (1-5), and (2) a custom software algorithm that automatically and independently quantified the number of open tubules.
Use of both the EndoActivator and EndoUltra resulted in significantly cleaner smear layer scores at all canal thirds compared to CI (P < .001). The EndoUltra yielded significantly cleaner scores than the EndoActivator at the apical third (P < .001); however, no significant difference was evident in the middle and coronal thirds. The software analysis yielded the same conclusions as the smear layer scores except statistical significance was seen between the EndoUltra and EndoActivator at all canal thirds (P < .02). Of the adjunctive irrigant activators, the EndoUltra opened 94%, 117%, and 26% more tubules in the apex, middle, and coronal thirds, respectively, than the EndoActivator.
The EndoUltra cleaned canals more effectively than the EndoActivator and CI.
本研究评估了使用注射器和针头冲洗（即传统冲洗[CI]）去除根管内玷污层的效果，同时比较了在有无使用EndoActivator®或EndoUltra®辅助激活的情况下的差异。
35颗前磨牙被分为三个实验组（n = 10）和一个对照组（n = 5）：（1）CI组，（2）CI加声波激活（EndoActivator）组，（3）CI加超声激活（EndoUltra）组，或（4）使用生理盐水的CI组。所有牙齿均预备至40号K锉。冲洗后，将牙齿劈开并使用扫描电子显微镜（SEM）成像。SEM图像由以下人员评估：（1）不知情的研究人员给出玷污层评分（1 - 5分），以及（2）一种定制软件算法，该算法可自动且独立地量化开放小管的数量。
与CI组相比，使用EndoActivator和EndoUltra在所有根管节段均产生了明显更清洁的玷污层评分（P < .001）。在根尖节段，EndoUltra产生的评分明显比EndoActivator更清洁（P < .001）；然而，在中节段和冠节段没有明显差异。软件分析得出的结论与玷污层评分相同，只是在所有根管节段EndoUltra和EndoActivator之间存在统计学差异（P < .02）。在辅助冲洗激活剂中，与EndoActivator相比，EndoUltra在根尖、中节段和冠节段分别多打开了94%、117%和26%的小管。
EndoUltra比EndoActivator和CI更有效地清洁根管。
