Department of Periodontology and Operative Dentistry, University of Münster, Münster, Germany.
Central Interdisciplinary Ambulance in the School of Dentistry, University of Münster, Münster, Germany.
J Endod. 2023 Nov;49(11):1548-1552. doi: 10.1016/j.joen.2023.08.006. Epub 2023 Aug 14.
To compare the biofilm-mimicking hydrogel removal efficiency of laser-activated irrigation (LAI) with five other irrigation techniques in simulated curved root canals with lateral canals.
Three-dimensional-printed root canal models (60°-curvature, radius 5 mm; dimension 25/.06) with a total length of 20 mm and lateral canals in all directions at 2, 5, and 8 mm (diameter 0.2 mm) from the apex were filled with a colored biofilm-mimicking hydrogel. The following protocols (each 3 × 20 seconds continuous irrigation with distilled water 3 ml/20 seconds; n = 20) were carried out: conventional needle irrigation; manual agitation ([MA], gutta-percha point 25/.06); EndoActivator (=sonically-activated irrigation EndoActivator, 25/.04); EDDY (=sonically-activated irrigation EDDY [SAI-E]; 25/.04); ultrasonically-activated irrigation and LAI (Erbium-doped Yttrium Aluminum Garnet laser; P400FL tip at canal entrance; 25 pps, 50 mJ, 300 μs). Standardized photos were taken with a microscope and the removal of the hydrogel was determined as a percentage for the entire system, the main canal and the lateral canals. Statistical analysis was performed using analysis of variance and Scheffé test (P = .05).
LAI (89.3% ± 5.9%) showed the greatest hydrogel removal followed by SAI-E (65.5% ± 3.3%) and ultrasonically-activated irrigation (59.1% ± 4.7%), with significant differences between these groups (P < .05). Needle irrigation, MA, and sonically-activated irrigation EndoActivator performed equally (P > .05) and obtained the significantly lowest values (P < .05). LAI and SAI-E showed the significantly best hydrogel removal from the main canal (P < .05). At all three levels, LAI removed significantly more hydrogel from the lateral canals than all other techniques (P < .05).
LAI was superior to other techniques in both the entire system and the lateral canals in removing the hydrogel. SAI-E achieved comparable results in the main canal.
为了比较激光激活冲洗(LAI)与其他五种冲洗技术在模拟带有侧支根管的弯曲根管中对生物膜模拟水凝胶的清除效率。
使用三维打印的根管模型(60°弯曲,半径 5mm;尺寸 25/.06),总长度为 20mm,在距根尖 2、5 和 8mm 处的各个方向上有侧支(直径 0.2mm),并用彩色生物膜模拟水凝胶填充。进行以下方案(每种方案持续 3×20 秒,用 3ml/20 秒的蒸馏水冲洗;n=20):常规针管冲洗;手动搅拌([MA],25/.06 牙胶尖);EndoActivator(=超声激活冲洗 EndoActivator,25/.04);EDDY(=超声激活冲洗 EDDY [SAI-E];25/.04);超声激活冲洗和 LAI(掺铒钇铝石榴石激光;P400FL 尖端位于根管入口处;25pps,50mJ,300μs)。使用显微镜拍摄标准化照片,并确定整个系统、主根管和侧支的水凝胶清除率。采用方差分析和 Scheffé 检验进行统计学分析(P=.05)。
LAI(89.3%±5.9%)显示出最大的水凝胶清除效果,其次是 SAI-E(65.5%±3.3%)和超声激活冲洗(59.1%±4.7%),这些组之间存在显著差异(P<.05)。针管冲洗、MA 和超声激活冲洗 EndoActivator 表现相同(P>.05),且获得的清除率最低(P<.05)。LAI 和 SAI-E 显示出对主根管中水凝胶的最佳清除效果(P<.05)。在所有三个水平上,LAI 从侧支清除的水凝胶量均显著多于其他技术(P<.05)。
LAI 在整个系统和侧支根管中均优于其他技术,而 SAI-E 在主根管中则具有相似的效果。