Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
image/svg+xml Jakob Voss, based on art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina and Beao Closed Access logo, derived from PLoS Open Access logo. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Closed_Access_logo_transparent.svg Jakob Voss, based on art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina and Beao International Endodo...arrow_drop_down
image/svg+xml Jakob Voss, based on art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina and Beao Closed Access logo, derived from PLoS Open Access logo. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Closed_Access_logo_transparent.svg Jakob Voss, based on art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina and Beao
International Endodontic Journal
Article . 2015 . Peer-reviewed
License: Wiley Online Library User Agreement
Data sources: Crossref
versions View all 2 versions
addClaim

This Research product is the result of merged Research products in OpenAIRE.

You have already added 0 works in your ORCID record related to the merged Research product.

Comparison of two negative pressure systems and syringe irrigation for root canal irrigation: an ex vivo study

Authors: C G, Adorno; V R, Fretes; C P, Ortiz; R, Mereles; V, Sosa; M F, Yubero; P M, Escobar; +1 Authors

Comparison of two negative pressure systems and syringe irrigation for root canal irrigation: an ex vivo study

Abstract

AbstractAimTo compare in a laboratory study two negative pressure systems and syringe irrigation, regarding the delivery of a contrast solution (CS) to working length (WL) and into simulated lateral canals and the effective volume of irrigant aspirated during negative pressure irrigation.MethodologyTwenty single‐canaled incisor training models were constructed with six simulated lateral canals each (2, 4 and 6 mm to WL) and a size 40, 0.04 taper apical size canal. Each model underwent all irrigation procedures (EndoVac at WL (EndoVac‐0) and WL–2 mm (EndoVac‐2), iNP needle with negative pressure (iNPn) and syringe irrigation with the iNP needle (iNPs) and a 30‐G side‐slot needle placed at WL (SI0) and WL–2 (SI2) mm in a crossover design. CS was delivered at 4 mL min−1 for 60 s with a peristaltic pump and a recovery device collected the volume (in mL) of irrigant suctioned by the negative pressure groups. The irrigation procedures were digitally recorded, and a still image of the 60‐s time‐point of irrigation was evaluated for CS distance to WL (in millimetres) after irrigation and penetration into lateral canals (3‐point scale). Statistical tests used were Kruskal–Wallis and Dunn's test.ResultsEndoVac‐0, iNPn and iNPs had median distances of CS to WL of 0 mm, followed by SI0 (0.2 mm), SI2 (0.7 mm) and EndoVac‐2 (1.7 mm). There were no significant differences between EndoVac‐0, iNPn, iNPs and SI0, but these were significantly different to SI2 and EndoVac‐2 (P < 0.05). There were no significant differences between the volume of CS delivered by syringe irrigation and that collected by iNPn (4 mL), but these were significantly greater than EndoVac‐0 (2.8 mL, P < 0.001) and EndoVac‐2 (2.85 mL, P < 0.001), which were not different to each other (P = 1.0). The irrigation procedures were ineffective at penetration into lateral canals.ConclusioniNPn, EndoVac‐0, iNPs and SI0 achieved greater irrigant penetration to WL. iNPn was able to collect a median volume of CS (4 mL) similar to that delivered by syringe irrigation (iNPp, SI0 and SI2). An adequate irrigant penetration into lateral canals could not be achieved by any of the systems.

Related Organizations
Keywords

Incisor, Cross-Over Studies, Root Canal Irrigants, Syringes, Contrast Media, Humans, In Vitro Techniques, Suction, Therapeutic Irrigation

  • BIP!
    Impact byBIP!
    selected citations
    These citations are derived from selected sources.
    This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    17
    popularity
    This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
    Top 10%
    influence
    This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    Average
    impulse
    This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
    Top 10%
Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
selected citations
These citations are derived from selected sources.
This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Citations provided by BIP!
popularity
This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Popularity provided by BIP!
influence
This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Influence provided by BIP!
impulse
This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Impulse provided by BIP!
17
Top 10%
Average
Top 10%
Upload OA version
Are you the author of this publication? Upload your Open Access version to Zenodo!
It’s fast and easy, just two clicks!