Irrigation Solution in Endodontic – Ultrasonic Irrigation | PPT
PowerPoint lecture slide
Size: 1 MB
More bacterial spores and dentine debris were removed during ultrasonic irrigation than hand irrigation.
Ø Ultrasonic proved superior to syringe irrigation alone when the canal narrowed to 0.3 mm (size 30 instrument) or less. (Teplitsky et al. 1987)
Types of endodntic needles
ü Beveled needle
ü Monoject endodontic needle.
ü ProRinse probes.
Ø Monoject endodontic needles to be the most efficient delivery system in which longer needles of a blunted, open-end system were inserted to the full length of the canal.
Ø The point is that a larger volume of solution can be delivered by this method. However, the closer the needle tip is placed to the apex, the greater the potential for damage to the periradicular tissues.
– It has closed-end and side vent.
– It eliminates possibilities of puncture of the apical foramen.
– Expression of fluid through the lumen creates turbulence around
and beyond the end of the probeز
Ø Evaluated were Becton-Dickinson 22-gauge needles;Monoject endodontic needles, 23 and 27 gauge; ProRinse 25-, 28-, and 30-gauge probes ; CaviEndo ultra- sonic handpiece; and the MicroMega.
Ø ProRinse probes were highly effective in all gauges and in all sizes of canals tested. In canals instrumented to size 30 K file and size 35 K file, the smaller-lumen 27- gauge notch-tip needle was found to be highly effective. The larger 23-gauge notch-tip needle was found to be relatively ineffective, as was the standard 22-gauge beveled needle
Ø The most important factor is the delivery system and not the irrigating solution per se.
Ø The volume of the irrigant is more important than the concentration or type of irrigant.
Walton and Torabinejad
Ø In order to be effective, the needle delivering the solution must come in close proximity to the material to be removed.”
Ø Small diameter needles were found to be more effective in reaching adequate depth but were more prone to problems of possible breakage and difficulty in expressing the irrigant from the narrow needles.
Abou-Rass M (1982)
Method of Use
Ø It is strongly recommended that the needle lie passively in the canal and not engage the walls.
Ø The solution must be introduced slowly.
Ø The irrigating needle should be bent to allow easier delivery of the solution and to prevent deep penetration of the needle.
Ø Care must be taken with irrigants like sodium hypochlorite to prevent accidents.
Ø There are inherent differences in the in vitro test model from the in vivo situation.
Ø In vivo variables that affect delivery of the irrigant are canal length and quality of instrumentation. In vitro results, although potentially valuable, cannot be directly extrapolated to the in vivo situation.
© DENTIST BD BLOG . All rights reserved.
WARNING: Any unauthorised use or reproduction of gr.dentistbd.com content for commercial or any purposes is strictly prohibited and constitutes copyright infringement liable to legal action.