FESEM evaluation of smear layer removal from conservatively shaped canals: laser activated irrigation (PIPS and SWEEPS) compared to sonic and passive ultrasonic activation-an ex vivo study.

BACKGROUND: Irrigation of the pulp space is a mandatory step to get rid of all its organic and inorganic content. Activation of the irrigants play a key role in the era of minimally invasive endodontics. The aim of this study was to assess the effectiveness of different irrigants activation methods in removing the smear layer at 1, 3, 5 and 8 mm from the apex from conservatively shaped canals. METHODS: Eighty-five human mandibular premolars were selected. Specimens were shaped to TruShape 25/.06 and divided into 5 groups (1 control and 4 test groups) according to the final activation technique (EndoActivator, EA), Ultrasonic (EndoUltra, PUI) and Laser (PIPS and SWEEPS). EDTA (Ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid) followed by NaOCl (Sodium Hypochlorite) and again EDTA were activated for each test group. Specimens were then split longitudinally and observed by Field Emission Scanning Electron Microscopy (FESEM). Blinded evaluation of the presence of smear layer was performed at 1000X magnification, according to a 5-score index system. Comparison between groups were analysed statistically using the Kruskal-Wallis non-parametric analysis of variance. Bonferroni multiple comparison tests were used. RESULTS: At 1 mm only PIPS and SWEEPS performed better than the control group. At 3, 5 and 8 mm from the apex, every activation technique showed statistically significant reduction of smear layer when compared to the control group. PIPS and SWEEPS obtained better cleanliness result compared to EA, while only PIPS was superior to PUI in terms of cleanliness. CONCLUSIONS: PIPS and SWEEPS showed the best results in conservative canal preparations. Nowadays, contemporary rotary instruments allow fast and minimally invasive shaping of the endodontic space. In this scenario irrigants' activation may be regarded as a mandatory step to a favourable clinical outcome.

Retreatability of calcium silicate-based root canal sealer using reciprocating instrumentation with different irrigation activation techniques in single-rooted canals.

This study analysed the bioceramic sealer cleaning ability of two chemo-mechanical systems in intact and restored teeth. Thirty-two single-rooted teeth were used, and half of them restored with a pre-endodontic composite restoration (PCR). All samples were instrumented with a size 40 Reciproc Blue file and filled with BioRoot RCS. Canals were retreated using the R40 and then R50 Reciproc Blue. The samples were divided into four experimental groups (n = 8): intact teeth/passive ultrasonic irrigation (PUI) (G1), intact teeth/shock wave-enhanced emission photoacoustic streaming (SWEEPS) (G2), PCR/PUI (G3) and PCR/SWEEPS (G4). The samples were scanned by micro-CT before and after retreatment, and the volume of remaining filling material was evaluated. The minor percentage of residues were observed in G2, with a volume of 0.447 ± 0.356% of the endodontic space (P < 0.001). The Reciproc/SWEEPS technique showed the better performance in intact teeth compared with PUI technique. Pre-endodontic restoration did not significantly affect the effectiveness of sealer removal.

Disinfection of Root Canals with Laser-Activated Irrigation, Photoactivated Disinfection, and Combined Laser Techniques: An Ex Vivo Preliminary Study.

Objective: This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of laser-activated irrigation using photon-induced photoacoustic streaming (PIPS®) and photoactivated disinfection (PAD) techniques and their combination to improve penetration and activation of toluidine blue in the endodontic space of teeth experimentally infected with Enterococcus faecalis. Materials and methods: Twenty-seven extracted single-root teeth were instrumented, sterilized, and infected with E. faecalis and divided into seven groups of three teeth each: Group A [sodium hypochlorite (NaClO) 5% hand irrigation], Group B [NaClO 5% hand irrigation+ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA)+NaClO 5% activated by PIPS], Group C (EDTA+NaClO 5% activated by PIPS), Group D (toluidine blue activated by PAD), Group E (toluidine blue activated by PIPS and PAD), Group F (NaClO 5% hand irrigation+toluidine blue activated by PAD), and Group G (NaClO 5% hand irrigation+toluidine blue activated by PIPS and PAD). Finally, positive and negative group controls were prepared. The presence of biofilms after the treatments was assessed by the BioTimer assay. PIPS was performed with an Er:YAG laser (2940 nm, LightWalker, Fotona® d.o.o., Slovenia) at 20 mJ, 15 Hz, 0.3 W, and 50-µs pulse duration. PAD was performed with a 635 nm diode laser (Smart M, Lasotronix®, Poland) at 400 mW in continuous wave (CW). Results: When NaClO was used, significant decontamination (p ≤ 0.05) was obtained in all experimental groups with respect to the positive control, other than Group G. Irrigation with EDTA+NaClO activated by PIPS produced a higher level of decontamination than Group A (p ≤ 0.05). Significant results in reducing biofilm load compared with the control and Group A were observed when NaClO was coupled with toluidine blue activated by PAD (p ≤ 0.05). Conclusions: Disinfection of root canals can be obtained using a combination of different irrigants, photosensitizers, and activation protocols. EDTA+NaClO using the PIPS protocol and toluidine blue activated by PAD (both preceded by NaClO irrigation) can be considered effective tools. The possibility of replacing NaClO with toluidine blue, whatever the method of activation, should be further investigated.