(PR085) Comparing the Debris Removal Effectiveness of Positive-Pressure Irrigation, Ultrasonic Activation Irrigation, and PulpSucker Closed-System Negative Pressure Irrigation System

This study compared three irrigation protocols’ ability to effectively remove a biofilm-mimicking hydrogel from a simulated single root canal system. The irrigation protocols compared were apical negative pressure with the PulpSucker (PS) system (PlanB Dental), ultrasonic activation irrigation (US) with Irrisafe (Acteon), and manual positive-pressure syringe irrigation (PPS). A 3D-printed root canal model (ACADENTAL) with a single 30° curvature was prepared with Vortex Blue size 35.04 files to 1mm short of apical endpoint. The canal patency was sealed, and the canal filled with a red-colored artificial biofilm-mimicking hydrogel. Irrigation protocols were as follows: Positive Pressure Syringe (PPS) with continuous irrigation of distilled water (12 ml/90 s; n=10); 3 ml of distilled water delivered over 20 seconds followed by Ultrasonic Activation (UA) for 20 seconds repeated twice, ending with a final flush of 3 ml over 20 seconds (total 12 ml; n=10); PulpSucker (PS) protocol with platform assembly delivered one bag distilled water (100 ml) over approximately 10 minutes until bag was emptied (n=10). Removal of hydrogel was measured as a percentage of red-colored pixels remaining after irrigation captured via standardized photos through a dental operating microscope and analyzed in FIJI image software. Statistical analysis was performed using one-way ANOVA and Tukey’s post hoc. There was a significant difference (p≤0.05) between irrigation protocols with PS removing the most hydrogel from the root canal model (93%), followed by UA (79%), then PPS (61%). In summary, while UA was superior to PPS, PS was superior to both UA and PPS in removing biofilm-mimicking hydrogel from a simulated single root canal.