Related Experiment Video
Updated: Feb 26, 2026

Pilot In Vitro Study to Assess Cleaning Ability and Effects of Different Decontamination Methods on Implant Surfaces
Published on: November 21, 2025
FESEM evaluation of smear layer removal using different irrigant activation methods (EndoActivator, EndoVac, PUI and
Manuele Mancini1, Loredana Cerroni2, Lorenzo Iorio2
1Department of Translational Medicine and Clinical Science, University of Rome "Tor Vergata", Via Montpellier 1, 00133, Rome, Italy. manuele.mancini@uniroma2.it.
Objectives:
This study was to compare the efficacy of EndoActivator, EndoVac, PUI, and LAI methods in removing the smear layer from root canals.
Materials And Methods:
Eighty single-rooted mandibular premolars were decoronated to a standardized length of 15 mm. Specimens were shaped to ProTaper F4 (Dentsply Maillefer) and irrigated with 5.25% NaOCl at 37 °C. Teeth were divided into six groups (two control groups [n = 10] and four test groups [n = 15]) according to the final irrigation activation/delivering technique (sonic irrigation [EndoActivator], passive ultrasonic irrigation [PUI], negative apical pressure [EndoVac], and laser activated irrigation [LAI]). Root canals were then split longitudinally and observed with field emission scanning electron microscopy to evaluate the presence of smear layer at 1, 3, 5, and 8 mm from the apex. Scores were analyzed by Kruskal-Wallis and Mann-Whitney U tests.
Results:
The EndoActivator was significantly more efficient than PUI, LAI, and control groups in removing the smear layer at 3, 5, and 8 mm from the apex. The EndoVac System removed statistically significantly more smear layer than all groups at 1 mm from the apex. At 5 mm from the apex, EndoActivator and EndoVac removed more smear layer than LAI and control groups. At 5 and 8 mm from the apex, PUI and EndoVac did not differ statistically, but both performed statistically better than the control groups.
Conclusion:
In our study, none of the activation/delivery systems completely removed the smear layer from the root canal walls; nevertheless, EV and EA showed, respectively, statistically significant better results at 1, 3, 5, and 8 mm and 3, 5, and 8 mm from the apex.
More Related Videos
06:36Effects of Mechanical Methods Used in Peri-implantitis Treatment on Implant Surface Decontamination and Roughness
Published on: March 14, 2025
08:20Systematic Approach to Identify Novel Antimicrobial and Antibiofilm Molecules from Plants' Extracts and Fractions to Prevent Dental Caries
Published on: March 31, 2021