Effect of Irrigation Activation Techniques on Periapical Organic Tissue Dissolution in Simulated Immature Teeth: An Ex Vivo Study †


DEMİRKAYA K., KORUCU H., UĞUR AYDIN Z., Bulak Yeliz S.

Bioengineering, cilt.13, sa.1, 2026 (SCI-Expanded, Scopus)

  • Yayın Türü: Makale / Tam Makale
  • Cilt numarası: 13 Sayı: 1
  • Basım Tarihi: 2026
  • Doi Numarası: 10.3390/bioengineering13010089
  • Dergi Adı: Bioengineering
  • Derginin Tarandığı İndeksler: Science Citation Index Expanded (SCI-EXPANDED), Scopus, BIOSIS, INSPEC, Directory of Open Access Journals, Academic Search Ultimate (EBSCO), Natural Science Collection (ProQuest), Biological Science Database (ProQuest), Materials Science & Engineering Collection (ProQuest), Technology Collection (ProQuest)
  • Anahtar Kelimeler: regenerative endodontics, irrigation activation techniques, ultrasonic irrigation (UI), photon-induced photoacoustic streaming (PIPS), shock wave-enhanced emission photoacoustic streaming (SWEEPS), apical tissue dissolution
  • Sağlık Bilimleri Üniversitesi Adresli: Evet

Özet

Background/Objectives: Effective removal of organic tissue extruded beyond the apex is crucial in regenerative endodontics, particularly in teeth with immature apices; therefore, this study aims to compare the efficacy of standard needle irrigation (SNI), ultrasonic irrigation (UI), photon-induced photoacoustic streaming (PIPS), and shock wave-enhanced emission photoacoustic streaming (SWEEPS) techniques in dissolving periapical tissue in a simulated model. Methods: Sixty single-rooted human premolars and sixty bovine palatal mucosa specimens were used. A custom model was created by placing mucosal tissue in contact with the apical area. Specimens were divided into four groups (n = 15) according to the irrigation method: SNI, UI, PIPS, and SWEEPS. Each canal received 15 mL of 2% NaOCl. Tissue samples were weighed before and after treatment. One-way ANOVA and Tukey’s post hoc test were used for statistical analysis (p < 0.05). Results: UI showed significantly less tissue dissolution than the other methods (p < 0.05). SNI, PIPS, and SWEEPS showed no significant differences (p > 0.05). Conclusions: All methods led to tissue loss, but UI was significantly less effective. SNI, PIPS, and SWEEPS performed similarly.