{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.020042643923240937, 'fraction_numerical': 0.008955223880597015, 'mean_word_length': 5.23936170212766, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Effectiveness of oxidative potential water as a root canal irrigant.

AIM
The aim of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of oxidative potential water (OPW) as an irrigant, based on its ability to remove the smear layer and/or debris from instrumented root canals.


METHODOLOGY
One hundred and twenty root canals from extracted human maxillary incisors were instrumented using a conventional step-back technique with irrigation from sodium hypochlorite (NaOCl) or oxidative potential water (OPW). After instrumentation, the canals were irrigated by syringe or ultrasound using 15% EDTA or OPW as an irrigant. The volume of each irrigant used for syringe irrigation was 10, 20, and 30 mL, respectively, whilst the duration for ultrasonic irrigation was 1, 3, and 5 min, respectively. After irrigation, each root was split longitudinally in two with cutting pliers, and the specimens were prepared for SEM observation. The presence of debris and smear layer on each canal wall was assessed using a three-point scale for each parameter.


RESULTS
Smear layer was effectively removed with EDTA both introduced via syringe and via ultrasonic irrigation. A similar effect was observed with OPW via syringe irrigation following instrumentation with 5% NaOCl. The canal walls in any of these cases showed open and patent dentinal tubules following smear layer removal. Some specimens irrigated with EDTA exhibited the effect of demineralization on the dentine resulting in funnelling of tubule orifices. Syringe irrigation was more effective in smear layer removal, except for ultrasonic irrigation with 15% EDTA, whilst ultrasonic irrigation was more effective in debris removal including the use of OPW as irrigant following instrumentation with 5% NaOCl. Neither syringe nor ultrasonic irrigation with OPW following instrumentation with OPW removed smear layer or debris effectively.


CONCLUSIONS
The most effective irrigation technique for smear removal was 15% EDTA irrigation by means of syringe following instrumentation with 5% NaOCl solution. However, the most effective irrigation technique for debris removal was ultrasonic irrigation regardless of irrigant used. OPW irrigation by means of syringe following instrumentation with 5% NaOCl showed a similar effect to that of 15% EDTA irrigation for removal of smear layer and debris.