ABSTRACT
Objective@#To compare the efficacy of different methods in the removal of calcium hydroxide from root canals and to provide a reference for clinical treatment. @*Methods@# A total of 160 extracted single-rooted mandibular premolars were instrumented up to ProTaper Universal F4. The roots were split longitudinally, and standardized groove and depression models were prepared and filled with calcium hydroxide. The samples were randomly divided into 4 groups (n=40) according to different irrigation methods: syringe needle irrigation, passive ultrasonic irrigation, XP-endo finisher (XPF) irrigation, and M3-Max irrigation. Each group was then divided into 2 subgroups (n=20) according to the irrigation protocol: NaOCl and NaOCl+EDTA. Photos of grooves and depressions were taken under a microscope after irrigation, and the residual calcium hydroxide was scored to compare the removal effects of different irritation methods and solutions.@*Results@#In the groove and depression model, when sodium hypochlorite is used as the irrigation fluid, ultrasound irrigation, XPF and M3-Max are better than syringe needle irrigation in removing calcium hydroxide (P < 0.05); when sodium hypochlorite combined with EDTA flushing, the effect of removing calcium hydroxide with ultrasound irrigation, XPF and M3-Max is better than that of syringe needle irrigation (P < 0.05); but there is no statistically significant difference between ultrasound, XPF and M3-Max (P > 0.05); when compared with the use of sodium hypochlorite, the combined use of EDTA irrigation could enhance the effect of ultrasonic irrigation, XPF and M3 Max on the removal of calcium hydroxide (P < 0.05), but there was no significant improvement in the syringe needle irrigation group (P > 0.05). @*Conclusion @#Sodium hypochlorite combined with EDTA can enhance the effect of ultrasonic irrigation, XPF and M3 Max on the removal of calcium hydroxide, and there is no significant difference among these approaches, which are more effective than syringe needle irrigation.