Assessment of Irrigant Agitation Devices in Simulated Closed and Open Root Canal Systems

IntroductionThe in vitro efficacy of irrigant activation devices has not been contrasted to their safety. This was attempted in this study using apically closed versus patent simulated root canal systems in epoxy resin models, with the latter featuring a simulated periapical lesion.MethodsAll 72 models had 2 joining canals connected by an isthmus, which was filled with dentin debris. The simulated periapical lesion was filled with colored gelatin in the 36 respective models. Canals were irrigated with 1.3% sodium hypochlorite. Samples were divided into 4 subgroups per system (n = 9): conventional irrigation, sonic low (EndoActivator; Dentsply Sirona, Charlotte, NC) and high frequency (EDDY; VDW, Munich, Germany), and ultrasonic agitation of the irrigant (always applying 3 cycles of 20 seconds). The total cleared surface areas (mm2) in the simulated isthmus and periapical lesion were compared between systems and devices using parametric tests (P < .05).ResultsThe cleaning of the isthmus was more effective in the apically open compared with the closed systems and was also significantly influenced by the agitation method (P < .001). In the closed systems, EDDY and ultrasonic agitation achieved the significantly (P < .05) best cleaning of the isthmus. In the open systems, ultrasonic agitation showed the single best result (P < .05). EDDY caused by far the highest and ultrasonic agitation the lowest dissolution of the gelatin in the simulated periapical lesion.ConclusionsUnder the conditions of this study, ultrasonic agitation of a previously administered sodium hypochlorite irrigant was more laterally targeted and thus safer and more effective than sonic agitation methods.