Evaluation of different irrigation solutions and activation methods on removing calcium hydroxide

Creative Commons License

Harzivartyan S., Hazar A. B. , Kartal N., Cimilli Z. H.

Journal Of Dental Sciences, vol.16, no.2, pp.700-705, 2021 (Journal Indexed in SCI Expanded)

  • Publication Type: Article / Article
  • Volume: 16 Issue: 2
  • Publication Date: 2021
  • Doi Number: 10.1016/j.jds.2020.09.003
  • Title of Journal : Journal Of Dental Sciences
  • Page Numbers: pp.700-705



Background/purpose:Dual Rinse HEDP is a soft chelator which can be used simul-taneously with sodium hypochlorite (NaOCl). The aim of this study is to evaluate the efficacy ofDual Rinse HEDP with different irrigation systems on removing calcium hydroxide [Ca(OH)2].

Materials and methods:Eighty maxillary central incisor teeth were shaped and a standardgroove on the apical third of the root canal surface was prepared. The root canals were filledwith Ca(OH)2. Samples were divided into two groups according to the solution and these twogroups were divided into three subgroups based on the activation technique. In group 1(nZ10) Ca(OH)2was removed using conventional irrigation with NaOCl whereas in group 2(nZ10) conventional irrigation with NaOCleDual Rinse HEDP mixture was used. Group 3(nZ15) and group 4 (nZ15) received sonic activation with the same irrigants as groups 1and 2 respectively. In group 5 (nZ15) passive ultrasonic irrigation (PUI) was used with NaOClwhile in group 6 (nZ15) the irrigant was the mixture. The amount of remaining Ca(OH)2in theartificial grooves were evaluated under a light microscope.

Results:None of the procedures managed to completely remove the Ca(OH)2from artificialgrooves. There was no significant difference between the groups (pZ0.053). The scores weresignificantly lower in PUI group compared to the other techniques between NaOCl groups(pZ0.021).

Conclusion:Dual Rinse HEDP does not make a difference on elimination of Ca(OH)2. PUI is moreefficient than both methods when NaOCl solution is used.