Efficacy of three different irrigation techniques in the removal of smear layer and organic debris from root canal wall: a scanning electron microscope study

Aim: Aim of this study was to compare the removal of smear layer and organic debris within the tooth canal among conventional needle irrigation, EndoVac and Endoactivator. Methodology: Eighty single-rooted extracted human teeth were prepared with rotary NiTi instrumentation and randomly separated into 4 groups. Twenty teeth were used as positive control (Group 1), irrigated with only saline. Teeth assigned to Group 2 (n = 20) received irrigation with a conventional syringe and a 30-gauge needle (NaviTip, Ultradent, South Jordan, UT); samples in Group 3 (n = 20) were rinsed with an irrigation device based on apical negative pressure (EndoVac, Discus Dental, Culver City, CA) and teeth in Group 4 (n = 20) were treated with a sonic irrigation system (EndoActivator, Dentsply Tulsa Dental, Tulsa, OK, USA). The amount of residual smear layer and debris was evaluated under a scanning electron microscope, and a semi-quantitative score was assigned to each root at the coronal, middle and apical thirds; the chi-square test was used to compare the results of the S.E.M. analysis. Results: EndoActivator performed the best cleansing for both smear layer and organic debris in all root canal thirds, followed by EndoVac and conventional irrigation (p > 0.001). EndoVac and conventional irrigation showed better cleaning in the coronal area, whereas EndoActivator performed an homogeneous cleansing at all levels. Conclusions: The EndoVac system and the EndoActivator system demonstrated significantly more efficacy in cleansing root canal walls than conventional needle irrigation