Journal of Conservative Dentistry
Home About us Editorial Board Instructions Submission Subscribe Advertise Contact e-Alerts Login 
Users Online: 1998
Print this page  Email this page Bookmark this page Small font sizeDefault font sizeIncrease font size
ORIGINAL RESEARCH ARTICLE
Year : 2016  |  Volume : 19  |  Issue : 4  |  Page : 368-372

Ultrasonic versus sonic activation of the final irrigant in root canals instrumented with rotary/reciprocating files: An in-vitro scanning electron microscopy analysis


Department of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, YMT Dental College and Hospital, Kharghar, Navi Mumbai, Maharashtra, India

Correspondence Address:
Dr. Neha Deepak Khalap
Department of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, YMT Dental College and Hospital, Kharghar, Navi Mumbai, Maharashtra
India
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/0972-0707.186451

Rights and Permissions

Aim: To compare the smear layer and debris removal in root canals instrumented with two different kinematic motions after ultrasonic and sonic irrigation activation. Materials and Methods: Eighty freshly extracted teeth were selected for the study and randomly divided the samples into two groups (n = 40) for instrumentation with either rotary ProTaper NEXT (PTN) or reciprocating WaveOne (WO) file systems. These (n = 40) were further divided into two groups (n = 20) where the final irrigant was activated using either Ultrasonics (Passive Ultrasonic Irrigation; PUI) or Sonics (EndoActivator; EA). Group 1: PTN + EA; Group 2: PTN + PUI; Group 3: WO + EA; and Group 4: WO + PUI. During instrumentation, a total of 4 ml of 5.25% NaOCl was used for irrigation. The final irrigation protocol included NaOCl and Smear Clear Solution. The samples were processed by scanning electron microscopic examination for debris and smear layer scoring, and statistical analysis was done. Results: The mean debris and smear layer score was less in the group instrumented by PTN with sonic activation of the irrigant. Conclusion: A combination of PTN instrumentation with sonic irrigation activation by EA is more effective in debris and smear layer removal in the groups tested.


[FULL TEXT] [PDF]*
Print this article     Email this article
 Next article
 Previous article
 Table of Contents

 Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
 Citation Manager
 Access Statistics
 Reader Comments
 Email Alert *
 Add to My List *
 * Requires registration (Free)
 

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed2848    
    Printed38    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded291    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal