Effectiveness of XP-Endo Finisher and passive ultrasonic irrigation on intracanal medicament removal from root canals: a systematic review and meta-analysis

15Citations
Citations of this article
72Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Background: XP-Endo Finisher (XPF) and passive ultrasonic irrigation (PUI) are commonly used in intracanal medicament removal. The effectiveness of these two techniques needs to be compared, and evidence-based research should be conducted. Methods: A comprehensive literature search was conducted in PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar up to December 20th, 2020. The outcomes of the included trials were pooled into the Cochrane Collaboration’s Review Manager 5.3 software. Cochrane’s risk-of-bias tool 2.0 was applied to assess the risk of bias. Results: Nine articles were included in this systematic review and processed for data extraction, and eight studies were identified for meta-analysis. In general, the use of PUI showed better medicament removal effectiveness than XPF (odds ratio [OR]: 3.09; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.96–4.86; P < 0.001). PUI was also significantly more efficient than XPF in the apical third (OR: 3.42; 95% CI, 1.32–8.84; P = 0.01). For trials using sodium hypochlorite (NaOCl) alone, PUI was also significantly more effective than XPF on intracanal medicaments removal (OR: 5.23; 95% CI, 2.79–9.82; P < 0.001). However, there was no significant difference between PUI and XPF when NaOCl and ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA) were used in combination (OR: 1.51; 95% CI, 0.74–3.09; P = 0.26). In addition, for studies whose intracanal medicament periods were two weeks, the effectiveness of PUI was statistically better than the XPF (OR: 7.73; 95% CI, 3.71–16.07; P < 0.001). Nevertheless, for trials whose intracanal medicament time was one week or over two weeks, no differences between the XPF and PUI were found (OR: 1.54; 95% CI, 0.74–3.22; P = 0.25) (OR: 1.42; 95% CI, 0.44–4.61; P = 0.56). Conclusions: The meta-analysis is the first study to quantitatively compare the effectiveness of XPF and PUI techniques on intracanal medicaments removal. With rigorous eligibility criteria, the study only included high-quality randomised controlled trials. The study indicated that PUI might be superior over XPF techniques for removing intracanal medicaments from artificial standardized grooves and cavities in the root canal system. The anatomical areas, irrigation protocol, and intracanal medicaments time may influence the cleaning efficacy.

References Powered by Scopus

Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: The PRISMA statement

53913Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses

49302Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions

37218Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Cited by Powered by Scopus

Removal of the Previous Root Canal Filling Material for Retreatment: Implications and Techniques

8Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

The efficacy of EndoActivator, passive ultrasonic irrigation, and Ultra X in removing calcium hydroxide from root canals: an in-vitro study

7Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

The Effectiveness of Different Irrigation Techniques on Debris and Smear Layer Removal in Primary Mandibular Second Molars: An In Vitro Study

5Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Zhou, J., Liu, T., & Guo, L. (2021). Effectiveness of XP-Endo Finisher and passive ultrasonic irrigation on intracanal medicament removal from root canals: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BMC Oral Health, 21(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12903-021-01644-7

Readers' Seniority

Tooltip

PhD / Post grad / Masters / Doc 14

67%

Professor / Associate Prof. 3

14%

Lecturer / Post doc 3

14%

Researcher 1

5%

Readers' Discipline

Tooltip

Medicine and Dentistry 24

89%

Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1

4%

Computer Science 1

4%

Engineering 1

4%

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free