Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

The comparison of cleaning efficacy and apical extrusion of advanced irrigation activation methods with a novel Er:YAG laser modality: sweeps

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Lasers in Dental Science Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

Laser-activated irrigation (LAI) is an activation method that is based on transferring pulsed energy to the irrigation solution by using different fiber tips and generating explosive vapor bubbles with a secondary cavitation effect, causing rapid solution movement through the root canal. This study aimed to compare different types of LAI and ultrasonically activated irrigation (UAI) in terms of cleaning efficacy by using scanning electron microscopy (SEM) images.

Methods

Sixty straight and single-rooted mature mandibular premolars were prepared with ProTaper Ni-Ti rotary instruments up to F4. According to the final irrigation/agitation protocols, four experimental groups (n = 15) were generated as conventional laser–activated irrigation (group 1: C.LAI), photon-induced photoacoustic streaming (group 2: PIPS), shock wave–enhanced emission photoacoustic streaming (group 3: SWEEPS), and passive ultrasonic irrigation (group 4:UAI). The irrigation protocols were performed for 60 s with 2.5% NaOCl and 17% EDTA. Debridement was evaluated using SEM with a scoring system. Apical extrusion was calculated using cube-shaped flower arrangement foam by subtracting the initial weights from the final weights. All data were statistically analyzed.

Results

C.LAI and SWEEPS showed significantly lower debris scores than PIPS and UAI (p < 0.001). However, there was no significant difference between C.LAI and SWEEPS. In the PIPS group, significantly more debris residue was found compared with the other groups. Apical extrusion was significantly lower in the PUI groups than in the laser-activated groups (C.LAI, PIPS, SWEEPS). There was no significant difference between laser-activated groups.

Conclusions

It can be concluded that the use of the C. LAI and novel laser-activated irrigation modality (SWEEPS) provides greater cleaning efficacy compared to UAI and PIPS. Besides, the observed results should not be generalized to teeth with shorter or longer root length and smaller or larger canal preparation with immature root development and open apices. In teeth with resorption, perforation defects or immature roots with open apex, the higher amount of apical extrusion should also be taken into account.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Caron G, Nham K, Bronnec F, Machtou P (2010) Effectiveness of different final irrigant activation protocols on smear layer removal in curved canals. J Endod 36(8):1361–1366

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Ricucci D, Siqueira JF Jr (2010) Fate of the tissue in lateral canals and apical ramifications in response to pathologic conditions and treatment procedures. J Endod 36(1):1–15

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Van der Sluis L et al (2007) Passive ultrasonic irrigation of the root canal: a review of the literature. Int Endod J 40(6):415–426

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Blanken J, de Moor RJG, Meire M, Verdaasdonk R (2009) Laser induced explosive vapor and cavitation resulting in effective irrigation of the root canal. Part 1: a visualization study. Lasers Surg Med: Off J Am Soc Laser Med Surg 41(7):514–519

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Arslan H et al (2013) Effect of agitation of EDTA with 808-nanometer diode laser on removal of smear layer. J Endod 39(12):1589–1592

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. De Moor RJG et al (2009) Laser induced explosive vapor and cavitation resulting in effective irrigation of the root canal. Part 2: evaluation of the efficacy. Lasers Surg Med: Off J Am Soc Laser Med 41(7):520–523

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. De Groot S et al (2009) Laser-activated irrigation within root canals: cleaning efficacy and flow visualization. Int Endod J 42(12):1077–1083

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. De Moor RJ et al (2010) Efficacy of ultrasonic versus laser-activated irrigation to remove artificially placed dentin debris plugs. J Endod 36(9):1580–1583

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. DiVito E, Peters OA, Olivi G (2012) Effectiveness of the erbium: YAG laser and new design radial and stripped tips in removing the smear layer after root canal instrumentation. Lasers Med Sci 27(2):273–280

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Cavalcanti TM et al (2011) Knowledge of the physical properties and interaction of laser with biological tissue in dentistry. An Bras Dermatol 86(5):955–960

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Keleş A et al (2015) Removal of filling materials from oval-shaped canals using laser irradiation: a micro–computed tomographic study. J Endod 41(2):219–224

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. DiVito E, Lloyd A (2012) ER: YAG laser for 3-dimensional debridement of canal systems: use of photon-induced photoacoustic streaming. Dent Today 31(11):122–124-7

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Olivi G, DiVito E (2012) Photoacoustic endodontics using PIPS™: experimental background and clinical protocol. J. Laser Health Acad 1:22–25

    Google Scholar 

  14. Lukač N, Gregorčič P, Jezeršek M (2016) Optodynamic phenomena during laser-activated irrigation within root canals. Int J Thermophys 37(7):66

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Lukac N et al (2017) Photoacoustic endodontics using the novel SWEEPS Er: YAG laser modality. J Laser Health Acad 1:1–7

    Google Scholar 

  16. George R, Walsh LJ (2008) Apical extrusion of root canal irrigants when using Er: YAG and Er, Cr: YSGG lasers with optical fibers: an in vitro dye study. J Endod 34(6):706–708

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Siqueira J Jr (2003) Microbial causes of endodontic flare-ups. Int Endod J 36(7):453–463

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Altundasar E, Nagas E, Uyanik O, Serper A (2011) Debris and irrigant extrusion potential of 2 rotary systems and irrigation needles. Oral Surg, Oral Med, Oral Pathol, Oral Radiol, Endod 112(4):e31–e35

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Hülsmann M, Rümmelin C, Schäfers F (1997) Root canal cleanliness after preparation with different endodontic handpieces and hand instruments: a comparative SEM investigation. J Endod 23(5):301–306

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Goel S, Tewari S (2009) Smear layer removal with passive ultrasonic irrigation and the NaviTip FX: a scanning electron microscopic study. Oral Surg, Oral Med, Oral Pathol, Oral Radiol, Endod 108(3):465–470

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Gulabivala K, Patel B, Evans G, Ng YL (2005) Effects of mechanical and chemical procedures on root canal surfaces. Endod Top 10(1):103–122

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. George R, Rutley EB, Walsh LJ (2008) Evaluation of smear layer: a comparison of automated image analysis versus expert observers. J Endod 34(8):999–1002

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Haupt F et al (2020) Effectiveness of different activated irrigation techniques on debris and smear layer removal from curved root canals: a SEM evaluation. Aust Endod J 46(1):40–46

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. De-Deus G et al (2011) Critical appraisal of published smear layer-removal studies: methodological issues. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 112(4):531–543

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Kimura Y et al (2002) Root surface temperature increase during Er: YAG laser irradiation of root canals. J Endod 28(2):76–78

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Gutknecht N et al (2005) Temperature evolution on human teeth root surface after diode laser assisted endodontic treatment. Lasers Med Sci 20(2):99–103

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. George R, Meyers IA, Walsh LJ (2008) Laser activation of endodontic irrigants with improved conical laser fiber tips for removing smear layer in the apical third of the root canal. J Endod 34(12):1524–1527

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Ozbay Y, Erdemir A (2018) Effect of several laser systems on removal of smear layer with a variety of irrigation solutions. Microsc ResTech 81(10):1214–1222

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Verstraeten J, Jacquet W, de Moor RJG, Meire MA (2017) Hard tissue debris removal from the mesial root canal system of mandibular molars with ultrasonically and laser-activated irrigation: a micro-computed tomography study. Lasers Med Sci 32(9):1965–1970

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Laky M, Volmer M, Arslan M, Agis H, Moritz A, Cvikl B (2018) Efficacy and safety of photon induced photoacoustic streaming for removal of calcium hydroxide in endodontic treatment. Biomed Res Int 2018:1–6

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. DiVito E, Peters O, Olivi G (2012) Effectiveness of the erbium: YAG laser and new design radial and stripped tips in removing the smear layer after root canal instrumentation. Lasers Med Sci 27(2):273–280

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Keleş A, Arslan H, Kamalak A, Akçay M, Sousa-Neto MD, Versiani MA (2015) Removal of filling materials from oval-shaped canals using laser irradiation: a micro–computed tomographic study. J Endod 41(2):219–224

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Deleu E, Meire MA, De Moor RJ (2015) Efficacy of laser-based irrigant activation methods in removing debris from simulated root canal irregularities. Lasers Med Sci 30(2):831–835

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Kamaci A, Aydin B, Erdilek N (2018) The effect of ultrasonically activated irrigation and laser based root canal irrigation methods on debris removal. Int J Artif Organs 41(2):71–75

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Akcay M, Arslan H, Mese M, Durmus N, Capar ID (2017) Effect of photon-initiated photoacoustic streaming, passive ultrasonic, and sonic irrigation techniques on dentinal tubule penetration of irrigation solution: a confocal microscopic study. Clin Oral Investig 21(7):2205–2212

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Arslan H, Akcay M, Saygili G, Keskı A, MeŞe İT, Gok A, Dalli M (2015) Bond strength of self-adhesive resin cement to root dentin. Comparison of photon-initiated photoacoustic streaming technique with needle and ultrasonic irrigation. Acta Odontol Scand 73(5):348–352

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Lukac N, Lukac M, Jezersek M (2016) QSP mode characteristics of 3rd generation ASP powered Er: YAG dental lasers. J LA&HA-J Laser Health Acad 2016(1):1–5

    Google Scholar 

  38. Lukac N, Suhovršnik T, Lukac M, Jezeršek M (2016) Ablation characteristics of quantum square pulse mode dental erbium laser. J Biomed Opt 21(1):015012

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Yang Q et al (2020) Micro-CT study on the removal of accumulated hard-tissue debris from the root canal system of mandibular molars when using a novel laser-activated irrigation approach. Int Endod J 53(4):529–538

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Ivanusic, T., et al., SSP/SWEEPS endodontics with the SkyPulse Er: YAG dental laser

  41. Galler K, Grubmüller V, Schlichting R, Widbiller M, Eidt A, Schuller C, Wölflick M, Hiller KA, Buchalla W (2019) Penetration depth of irrigants into root dentine after sonic, ultrasonic and photoacoustic activation. Int Endod J 52(8):1210–1217

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Jezeršek M et al (2019) Evaluation of Apical Extrusion During Novel Er: YAG Laser-Activated Irrigation Modality. Photobiomodul Photomed Laser Surg 37(9):544–550

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Özer SY, Basaran E (2013) Evaluation of microleakage of root canal fillings irradiated with different output powers of erbium, chromium: yttrium-scandium-gallium-garnet laser. Aust Endod J 39(1):8–14

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. da Costa Ribeiro A et al (2007) Effects of diode laser (810 nm) irradiation on root canal walls: thermographic and morphological studies. J Endod 33(3):252–255

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Arslan D, Kustarci A (2018) Efficacy of photon-initiated photoacoustic streaming on apically extruded debris with different preparation systems in curved canals. Int Endod J 51:e65–e72

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Gungor OE, Kustarci A (2016) Evaluation of apically extruded debris using two NiTi systems associated with two irrigation techniques in primary teeth. J Clin Pediatr Dent 40(6):490–495

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Gregorcic P et al (2014) Synchronized delivery of Er: YAG-laser-pulse energy during oscillations of vapor bubbles. J Laser Health Acad 1:14–19

    Google Scholar 

  48. Jiang L-M, Verhaagen B, Versluis M, van der Sluis LWM (2010) Influence of the oscillation direction of an ultrasonic file on the cleaning efficacy of passive ultrasonic irrigation. J Endod 36(8):1372–1376

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Jezeršek M, Jereb T, Lukač N, Tenyi A, Lukač M, Fidler A (2019) Evaluation of apical extrusion during novel Er: YAG laser-activated irrigation modality. Photobiomodul, Photomed, Laser Surg 37(9):544–550

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Yao K, Satake K, Watanabe S, Ebihara A, Kobayashi C, Okiji T (2017) Effect of laser energy and tip insertion depth on the pressure generated outside the apical foramen during Er: YAG laser-activated root canal irrigation. Photomed Laser Surg 35(12):682–687

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  51. Azim AA, Aksel H, Margaret Jefferson M, Huang GTJ (2018) Comparison of sodium hypochlorite extrusion by five irrigation systems using an artificial root socket model and a quantitative chemical method. Clin Oral Investig 22(2):1055–1061

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Özer SY, Basaran E (2013) Evaluation of microleakage of root canal fillings irradiated with different output powers of erbium, chromium: yttrium-scandium-gallium-garnet laser. Aust Endod J 39(1):8–14

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Huang X et al (2007) Quantitative evaluation of debris extruded apically by using ProTaper universal Tulsa rotary system in endodontic retreatment. J Endod 33(9):1102–1105

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Hachmeister DR et al (2002) The sealing ability and retention characteristics of mineral trioxide aggregate in a model of apexification. J Endod 28(5):386–390

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

This study was supported by the Scientific Research Fund of RTE University in Rize/Turkey. (No: TSA-2018-954).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Endodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Recep Tayyip Erdoğan Universty, 53000, Rize, Turkey

    Banu Arıcıoğlu, Ahter Şanal Çıkman & Merve Babacan

Authors
  1. Banu Arıcıoğlu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Ahter Şanal Çıkman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Merve Babacan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Banu Arıcıoğlu.

Ethics declarations

Ethical approval

This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Arıcıoğlu, B., Çıkman, A.Ş. & Babacan, M. The comparison of cleaning efficacy and apical extrusion of advanced irrigation activation methods with a novel Er:YAG laser modality: sweeps. Laser Dent Sci 5, 43–52 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s41547-021-00113-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s41547-021-00113-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation