The efficacy of ultrasonic and PIPS (photon-induced acoustic streaming) irrigation to remove artificially placed dentine debris plugs out of an artificial and natural root model

The aim was to validate an artificial resin ‘root canal wall groove model’ (RCWGM) mimicking the situation of natural roots with a groove of identical dimensions on debris removal out of these grooves, and to evaluate Erbium ‘laser-activated irrigation’ (LAI) with two conical tips at PIPS (photon-induced photoacoustic streaming) settings, with different activation times and different root canal positions on debris removal out of the grooves. A split RCWGM was used (resin blocks and roots of maxillary canines) with a canal size 40/0.06. The grooves in the apical third were filled with stained dentinal debris. Seventeen irrigation protocols (n = 20) were used: syringe-needle irrigation (3× 20 s), manual dynamic activation (1× 60 s), ultrasonically activated irrigation (UAI) with 25/25 Irrisafe (3× 20 s) and LAI (2940 nm Er:YAG) with X-Pulse or PIPS tips at PIPS settings (20 mJ, 50 μs, 20 Hz) and with the fibre (IN) or (OUT) the canal: IN during 1× 20 s, and OUT during 1× 20 s, 2× 20 s, 3× 20 s, 30 s, 2× 30 s and 1× 60 s. The quantity of remaining dentine debris in the groove was evaluated on a numerical scale. Statistical analysis was performed by means of proportional odds logistic regression, equivalence testing and Wald tests. The level of significance was set at 0.05. Resin models and the RCWGM with natural teeth can be called equivalent (log odds ratio 0.185). There were mostly no statistically significant differences for debris removal between UAI and LAI (p > 0.05) and between LAI with PIPS and X-Pulse (p > 0.05). Although not statistically different, the numbers of completely cleaned grooves were higher with LAI than with UAI for a 1-min activation, confirming findings from other studies. There is no difference in cleaning efficacy between X-Pulse and PIPS tips at PIPS settings.