Oral Irrigator for periodontist.pptx (2025)

A survey of endodontic irrigants used by dentists with varying years of professional experience

Balkan Journal of Dental Medicine, 2018

Background/Aim: The aim of the present study was to describe the use of irrigants by dentists in Bulgaria in relation to their years of professional experience. Material and Methods: The data were collected with the help of a questionnaire. The survey included questions concerning frequency of irrigants applied, their respective concentrations, as well as spectrum of disinfectants used in endodontics. In addition, information about respondents' age, years of professional experience, gender, and main areas of continuing education was collected. The statistical analysis was performed with the help of IBM SPSS Statistics 22.0. Results: 219 replies were analysed (response rate 27,3%). The majority of the respondents (31.1%) had 21 to 30 years of professional experience. 18.7% had over 30 years. Most of the practitioners reported their continuing education to be in the area of general dentistry-52%, while about 1.2 % had specialised in endodontics. Dentists with long-standing professional experience use predominantly H 2 O 2-78%. Dentists with least experience use 17% EDTA-53.6%. No significant differences were established for the use of sodium hypochlorite and 2% chlorhexidine. 82% of the respondents use conventional needle 27G for intracanal irrigation; 60% never use ultrasonic irrigation. Conclusions: The analysis of the usage of irrigants shows that many general dental practitioners do not follow the quality recommended protocols for endodontic irrigation protocols.

Endodontic irrigation systems: Review article

Successful endodontic treatment hinges on meticulous chemo-mechanical preparation, elimination of microbial toxins, thorough irrigation, and complete root canal obturation. Hand and rotary instrumentation are pivotal in removing microorganisms through direct mechanical cleansing. The primary goal of instrumentation is to facilitate effective disinfection, irrigation, and filling. However, the complex root canal morphology, characterized by curved apical thirds, apical deltas, narrow isthmuses, and oval or ribbon-shaped canals, poses challenges to mechanical cleaning. These inaccessible areas harbor bacteria, contributing significantly to endodontic failures and the development of pulpal and periapical diseases. Achieving complete canal disinfection with a single irrigant is arduous; thus, employing multiple effective irrigation activation system is essential. This review article aims to elucidate contemporary methods for effective irrigation in light of recent advancements.

Root Canal Irrigation Devices: An Update

2018

In hierarchy of cleaning and shaping of root canal, root canal irrigation systems are indispensable aids in dissolving and activating organic debris and destroying microorganisms. Effective delivery of irrigants and its agitation is a prerequisite for successful endodontic treatment. The technological advancements in the last decade has brought foreward the new agitation devices like ENDOACTIVATOR: designed to safely and vigorously energise hydrodynamic phenomenon, ENDOVAC that is based on a true apical negative pressure irrigation, VIBRING is a new sonic irrigation system, RINSENDO is pressure suction technology, QUANTEC-E-IRRIGATION is self-contained fluid delivery unit that is attached to the quantic eendo system. OZONE THERAPY: has completely revolutionized dentistry with its highly antimicrobial, disinfectant, biocompatibility and healing potential. Regarding the safety factors, capacity of high volume irrigant delivery and ease of application, the newer irrigation devices have...

Survey of Endodontic Irrigants Used by Dentists With Varying Years of Professional Experience

Balkan Journal of Dental Medicine

SummaryBackground/Aim: The aim of the present study was to describe the use of irrigants by dentists in Bulgaria in relation to their years of professional experience. Material and Methods: The data were collected with the help of a questionnaire. The survey included questions concerning frequency of irrigants applied, their respective concentrations, as well as spectrum of disinfectants used in endodontics. In addition, information about respondents’ age, years of professional experience, gender, and main areas of continuing education was collected. The statistical analysis was performed with the help of IBM SPSS Statistics 22.0. Results: 219 replies were analysed (response rate 27,3%). The majority of the respondents (31.1%) had 21 to 30 years of professional experience. 18.7% had over 30 years. Most of the practitioners reported their continuing education to be in the area of general dentistry - 52%, while about 1.2 % had specialised in endodontics. Dentists with long-standing pr...

Endodontic irrigants: Different methods to improve efficacy and related problems

European journal of dentistry

Shaping and cleaning a root canal system along with the preservation of the surrounding periodontal tissues are the principal goals of an endodontic treatment. While most of the attention is paid to the mechanical aspects of a root canal treatment, an essential feature of it is the irrigation. All over the years, many materials have been used to clean the root canal of a tooth, and certainly, the sodium hypochlorite (NaOCl) and ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid solutions are the most used and most reliable ones. Putting them inside of a canal is mostly done using a normal syringe, but many techniques have been involved in this process, including the use of sonic/ultrasonic instruments, the use of shaping files, and even laser, to increase the efficacy of irrigant solutions, especially of NaOCl one. Each one of this technique faces some disadvantages, just as the vapor lock effect and the apical extrusion, and has a different action on features such as the reaction rate and the shear s...

Activated Irrigation vs. Conventional non-activated Irrigation in Endodontics – A Systematic Review

European Endodontic Journal, 2019

INTRODUCTION Root canal irrigation plays a pivotal role in Endodontics, to facilitate instrumentation by lubrication, remove debris, microorganisms, smear layer and prevent apical debris packing. Irrigants exert their effects, by mechanical, chemical and biological actions (1). On the mechanical front, streaming forces are delivered to the canal walls. On the chemical front, the active components exert specific actions on the organic and inorganic debris. On the biological front, the antimicrobial action on the organisms in the canal help inactivate or kill them. Root canals are considered "closed systems" (2) where the fluid dynamics of the irrigant plays a major role in ensuring optimal actions. This "irrigation dynamics" (1) refers to how they flow, penetrate and exchange within the root canal walls. Conventional irrigation methods, at best deliver irrigant just 1mm beyond the needle tip. This may help microbes thrive after treatment in the safe havens of root canals, namely the lateral, accessory canals, fins, isthmii and anastomoses. Hence to improvise the cleansing effectiveness of irrigants and thorough removal of microbes, many activation devices are being used. Activated irrigation may be defined as using a method to agitate and improve the flow of irrigants to the intricacies of root canal system by mechanical or other energy forms. While conventional • Irrigant activation proves to be beneficial, in terms of post-operative pain intensity, debridement and canal & isthmus cleanliness. However, no significant benefit can be proved with the available evidence, for activation in terms of antibacterial effect and long term healing of lesions. HIGHLIGHTS Objective: Irrigant activation has been claimed to be beneficial in in vitro and clinical studies. This systematic review aims to investigate the clinical efficiency of mechanically activated irrigants and conventional irrigation. Methods: A literature search (PROSPERO registration number: CRD42018112595) was undertaken in PubMed, Cochrane and hand search. The inclusion criteria were clinical trials, in vivo/ex vivo on adult permanent teeth involving an active irrigation device and a control group of conventional irrigation. The exclusion criteria were studies done in vitro, animals and foreign language. Adult patients requiring endodontic treatment of permanent dentition and irrigant activation during the treatment were chosen as the participants and intervention respectively. Results: After removal of duplicates, 89 articles were obtained, and 72 were excluded as they did not meet the selection criteria. 6 devices (EndoVac, EndoActivator, Ultrasonic, MDA (manual dynamic agitation), CUI (Continuous Ultrasonic Irrigation) and PUI (Passive Ultrasonic Irrigation)) and 6 variables of interest (Post-operative pain, periapical healing, antibacterial efficacy, canal and/or isthmus cleanliness, debridement efficacy and delivery up to working length) were evaluated in the 17 included articles. The risk of bias and quality of the selected articles were moderate. Results showed that mechanical active irrigation reduces post-operative pain. It improved debridement, canal/isthmus cleanliness. It also improved delivery of irrigant up to working length. Bacterial count was more with active irrigation, though not significant. There is no effect on long-term periapical healing. Conclusion: It may be concluded that mechanical active irrigation devices are beneficial in reducing postoperative pain and improving canal and isthmus cleanliness during Endodontics.

Evaluation of the efficacy of 0.12% chlorhexidine and water as Oral Irrigants in Chronic Periodontitis

Journal of Advanced Medical and Dental Sciences Research, 2019

Background: Different irrigating solutions may serve to provide bacteria free environment. The present study was conducted to compare efficacy of different irrigating solution in root canal treatment. Materials & Methods: The present comprised of 40 mandibular molars with chronic periodontitis. All teeth were divided into 2 groups of 20 each. In group I teeth were irrigated with 0.12% chlorhexidine and in group II teeth were irrigated with water. In both groups, plaque score and gingival scores were recorded at day 1, 7 and 21. Results: In group I teeth were irrigated with 0.12% chlorhexidine and in group II teeth were irrigated with water. Plaque score at day 1 was 1.34, at 7 days was 1.12 and at 21 days was 1.02 in group I. It was 2.98 at day 1, 2.02 at day 7 and 1.56 at day 21. The difference was significant (P< 0.05). Gingival score at day 1 was 1.12, at 7 days was 1.04 and at 21 days was 0.82 in group I. It was 2.26 at day 1, 1.98 at day 7 and 1.16 at day 21. The difference was significant (P< 0.05). Conclusion: Authors suggested that the efficacy of any irrigating solution can be judged by its ability to relieve symptoms. 0.12% chlorhexidine found to be better in root canal therapy.

Emerging trends in endodontic irrigation

International Journal of Applied Dental Sciences, 2021

The main goal of endodontic treatment should be to focus on the predictable elimination of microorganisms from the root canal system. Irrigation has become a critical component of adequate root canal treatment. To obtain the goal of safe and effective irrigation methods this article review is to give a brief idea about irrigation devices and recent methods of irrigation. The irrigation process is often dismissed during endodontic treatment, must not be overlooked. It is one of the major keys of success for endodontic treatment.

Irrigation in Endodontics: “Slow and Steady wins the Race, Clean and Tidy wins the Chase”

International Journal of Oral Care & Research, 2016

Radiological Evaluation of Penetration of the Irrigant according to Three Endodontic Irrigation Techniques

International Journal of Dentistry, 2016

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 iRace5 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 CLEAN5. 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 ( = 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.