Dostęp do tego artykułu jest płatny.
Zapraszamy do zakupu!
Cena: 12.50 PLN (z VAT)
Kup artykuł
Po dokonaniu zakupu artykuł w postaci pliku PDF prześlemy bezpośrednio pod twój adres e-mail.
Tools used to activate rinsing agents in endodontics. Is it worth using them?
Krzysztof Schmeidl, Monika Bugajska
Streszczenie
W pracy opisano współczesne urządzenia stosowane w celu zwiększenia działania środków płuczących w leczeniu endodontycznym. Aktywacja płynu w prawidłowo opracowanym kanale korzeniowym odgrywa bardzo ważną rolę w usuwaniu z niego biofilmu i warstwy mazistej. Wykorzystanie aktywacji dźwiękowej, ultradźwiękowej , a także ewakuacja płynu z kanałów korzeniowych za pomocą podciśnienia spełniają obecne standardy leczenia endodontycznego.
Abstract
The study describes contemporary tools used in increasing efficacy of chemical irrigation in endodontic treatment. Activation of irrigating solutions in properly cleaned and shaped root canal system plays major role in elimination of endodontic biofilm and smear layer. Activation of endodontic solution by means of ultrasonic, sonic or negative pressure devices meet current standards of endodontic treatment.
Hasła indeksowe: aktywacja w endodoncji, płukanie kanału korzeniowego, aktywacja ultradźwiękowa, warstwa mazista
Key words: activation in endodontics, root canal irrigation, ultrasonic agitation , smear layer
PIŚMIENNICTWO
1. Basrani B., Haapasalo M.: Update on endodontic irrigating solutions. Endod. Topics, 2012, 27, 74-102.
2. Caron G., Nham K., Bronnec F., Machtou P.: Effectiveness of different final irrigant activation protocols on smear layer removal in curved canals. J. Endod., 2010, 36, 8, 1361-1366.
3. Rödig T., Bozkurt M., Konietschke F., Hülsmann M.: Comparison of the Vibringe system with syringe and passive ultrasonic irrigation in removing debris from simulated root canal irregularities. J. Endod., 2010, 36, 8, 1410-1413.
4. Urban K., Donnermeyer D., Schäfer E., Bürklein S.: Canal cleanliness using different irrigation activation systems: a SEM evaluation. Clin. Oral Investig., 2017, 21, 9, 2681-2687.
5. Kamel W.H., Kataia E.M.: Comparison of the efficacy of Smear Clear with and without a canal brush in smear layer and debris removal from instrumented root canal using WaveOne versus ProTaper: a scanning electron microscopic study. J. Endod., 2014, 40, 3, 446-450.
6. Protogerou E., Arvaniti I., Vlachos I., Khabbaz M.G.: Effectiveness of a canal brush on removing smear layer: a scanning electron microscopic study. Braz. Dent. J., 2013, 24, 6, 580-584
7. Romualdo P.C., de Oliveira K.M., Nemezio M.A. i wsp.: Does apical negative pressure prevent the apical extrusion of debris and irrigant compared with conventional irrigation? A systematic review and meta-analysis. Aust. Endod. J., 2017, DOI: 10.1111/aej.12162.
8. Nielsen B.A., Craig Baumgartner J.: Comparison of the EndoVac system to needle irrigation of root canals. J. Endod., 2007, 33, 5, 611-615.
9. Siu C., Baumgartner J.C.: Comparison of the debridement efficacy of the EndoVac irrigation system and conventional needle root canal irrigation in vivo. J. Endod., 2010, 36, 11, 1782-1785.
10. Keleş A., Alçin H.: Use of EndoVac system for aspiration of exudates from a large periapical lesion: a case report. J. Endod., 2015, 41,10, 1735-1737.
11. Li D., Jiang S., Yin X.: Efficacy of needle, ultrasonic, and endoactivator irrigation and photon-induced photoacoustic streaming in removing calcium hydroxide from the main canal and isthmus: an in vitro micro-computed tomography and scanning electron microscopy study. Photomed. Laser Surg., 2015, 33, 6, 330-337.
12. Park E.: Ultrasonics in endodontics. Endod. Topics, 2013, 29, 57-75.
13. van der Sluis L.W., Versluis M., Wu M.K.,Wesselink P.R.: Passive ultrasonic irrigation of the root canal: a review of the literature. Int. Endod. J., 2007, 40, 6, 415-426.
14. Zorzin J., Wießner J., Wießner T. i wsp.: Removal of radioactively marked calcium hydroxide from the root canal: influence of volume of irrigation and activation. J. Endod., 2016, 42, 4, 637-640.
15. Kersten D.D., Mines P., Sweet M.: Use of the microscope in endodontics: results of a questionnaire. J. Endod., 2008, 34, 804-807.
16. Law A.S., Withrow J.C.: Endodontic case difficulty assessment and referral. ENDODONTICS: Colleagues for Excellence Spring/Summer 2005.
17. Gu L.S., Kim J.R., Ling J. i wsp: Review of contemporary irrigant agitation techniques and devices. J. Endod., 2009, 35, 791-804.
18. McGill S., Gulabivala K., Mordan N., Ng Y.L.: The efficacy of dynamic irrigation using a commercially available system (RinsEndo) determined by removal of a collagen “bio-molecular film” from an ex vivo model. Int. Endod. J., 2008, 41, 7, 602-608.
19. Andrabi S.M., Kumar A., Zia A. i wsp.: Effect of passive ultrasonic irrigation and manual dynamic irrigation on smear layer removal from root canals in a closed apex in vitro model. J. Investig. Clin. Dent., 2014, 5, 3, 188-193.
20. Salehrabi R., Rotstein I.: Endodontic treatment outcomes in a large patient population in the USA: an epidemiological study. J. Endod., 2004, 30, 846-850.
Krzysztof Schmeidl, Monika Bugajska
Streszczenie
W pracy opisano współczesne urządzenia stosowane w celu zwiększenia działania środków płuczących w leczeniu endodontycznym. Aktywacja płynu w prawidłowo opracowanym kanale korzeniowym odgrywa bardzo ważną rolę w usuwaniu z niego biofilmu i warstwy mazistej. Wykorzystanie aktywacji dźwiękowej, ultradźwiękowej , a także ewakuacja płynu z kanałów korzeniowych za pomocą podciśnienia spełniają obecne standardy leczenia endodontycznego.
Abstract
The study describes contemporary tools used in increasing efficacy of chemical irrigation in endodontic treatment. Activation of irrigating solutions in properly cleaned and shaped root canal system plays major role in elimination of endodontic biofilm and smear layer. Activation of endodontic solution by means of ultrasonic, sonic or negative pressure devices meet current standards of endodontic treatment.
Hasła indeksowe: aktywacja w endodoncji, płukanie kanału korzeniowego, aktywacja ultradźwiękowa, warstwa mazista
Key words: activation in endodontics, root canal irrigation, ultrasonic agitation , smear layer
PIŚMIENNICTWO
1. Basrani B., Haapasalo M.: Update on endodontic irrigating solutions. Endod. Topics, 2012, 27, 74-102.
2. Caron G., Nham K., Bronnec F., Machtou P.: Effectiveness of different final irrigant activation protocols on smear layer removal in curved canals. J. Endod., 2010, 36, 8, 1361-1366.
3. Rödig T., Bozkurt M., Konietschke F., Hülsmann M.: Comparison of the Vibringe system with syringe and passive ultrasonic irrigation in removing debris from simulated root canal irregularities. J. Endod., 2010, 36, 8, 1410-1413.
4. Urban K., Donnermeyer D., Schäfer E., Bürklein S.: Canal cleanliness using different irrigation activation systems: a SEM evaluation. Clin. Oral Investig., 2017, 21, 9, 2681-2687.
5. Kamel W.H., Kataia E.M.: Comparison of the efficacy of Smear Clear with and without a canal brush in smear layer and debris removal from instrumented root canal using WaveOne versus ProTaper: a scanning electron microscopic study. J. Endod., 2014, 40, 3, 446-450.
6. Protogerou E., Arvaniti I., Vlachos I., Khabbaz M.G.: Effectiveness of a canal brush on removing smear layer: a scanning electron microscopic study. Braz. Dent. J., 2013, 24, 6, 580-584
7. Romualdo P.C., de Oliveira K.M., Nemezio M.A. i wsp.: Does apical negative pressure prevent the apical extrusion of debris and irrigant compared with conventional irrigation? A systematic review and meta-analysis. Aust. Endod. J., 2017, DOI: 10.1111/aej.12162.
8. Nielsen B.A., Craig Baumgartner J.: Comparison of the EndoVac system to needle irrigation of root canals. J. Endod., 2007, 33, 5, 611-615.
9. Siu C., Baumgartner J.C.: Comparison of the debridement efficacy of the EndoVac irrigation system and conventional needle root canal irrigation in vivo. J. Endod., 2010, 36, 11, 1782-1785.
10. Keleş A., Alçin H.: Use of EndoVac system for aspiration of exudates from a large periapical lesion: a case report. J. Endod., 2015, 41,10, 1735-1737.
11. Li D., Jiang S., Yin X.: Efficacy of needle, ultrasonic, and endoactivator irrigation and photon-induced photoacoustic streaming in removing calcium hydroxide from the main canal and isthmus: an in vitro micro-computed tomography and scanning electron microscopy study. Photomed. Laser Surg., 2015, 33, 6, 330-337.
12. Park E.: Ultrasonics in endodontics. Endod. Topics, 2013, 29, 57-75.
13. van der Sluis L.W., Versluis M., Wu M.K.,Wesselink P.R.: Passive ultrasonic irrigation of the root canal: a review of the literature. Int. Endod. J., 2007, 40, 6, 415-426.
14. Zorzin J., Wießner J., Wießner T. i wsp.: Removal of radioactively marked calcium hydroxide from the root canal: influence of volume of irrigation and activation. J. Endod., 2016, 42, 4, 637-640.
15. Kersten D.D., Mines P., Sweet M.: Use of the microscope in endodontics: results of a questionnaire. J. Endod., 2008, 34, 804-807.
16. Law A.S., Withrow J.C.: Endodontic case difficulty assessment and referral. ENDODONTICS: Colleagues for Excellence Spring/Summer 2005.
17. Gu L.S., Kim J.R., Ling J. i wsp: Review of contemporary irrigant agitation techniques and devices. J. Endod., 2009, 35, 791-804.
18. McGill S., Gulabivala K., Mordan N., Ng Y.L.: The efficacy of dynamic irrigation using a commercially available system (RinsEndo) determined by removal of a collagen “bio-molecular film” from an ex vivo model. Int. Endod. J., 2008, 41, 7, 602-608.
19. Andrabi S.M., Kumar A., Zia A. i wsp.: Effect of passive ultrasonic irrigation and manual dynamic irrigation on smear layer removal from root canals in a closed apex in vitro model. J. Investig. Clin. Dent., 2014, 5, 3, 188-193.
20. Salehrabi R., Rotstein I.: Endodontic treatment outcomes in a large patient population in the USA: an epidemiological study. J. Endod., 2004, 30, 846-850.
