# SEM and Bacteriological Evidence of Laser-Activated Irrigation Compared to Ultrasonic-Activated Irrigation: A Pilot Study

## TL;DR

This study compared laser and ultrasonic methods for cleaning root canals and found both were ineffective at removing bacteria and tissue in hard-to-reach areas.

## Contribution

The study provides new empirical evidence on the limitations of laser-activated irrigation in endodontic debridement.

## Key findings

- Laser-activated irrigation left bacteria and biofilm in root canals.
- Ultrasonic-activated irrigation also failed to fully disinfect infected canals.
- Laser fiber tips degraded after use, potentially reducing effectiveness.

## Abstract

Background: Pulp tissue debridement and the eradication of microorganisms from an infected root canal system before obturation is a primary focus of endodontic treatment and the best predictor for the long-term success of endodontic treatment. Objective: The purpose of this in vitro laboratory study was to evaluate pulp tissue debridement and the disinfection efficacy of two different Er;Cr:YSGG laser units, with a 2790 nm wavelength, compared to ultrasonic-activated irrigation (UAI) in root canals infected with Enterococcus faecalis. Methods: Human non-infected mandibular first molars were extracted, disinfected, and cultured with Enterococcus faecalis. Different types of Er;Cr:YSGG laser irrigation and UAI were performed according to the manufacturers’ protocols. The teeth were then processed for bacteriological and SEM analyses. Results: The different laser-activated irrigation protocols showed multiple areas of remaining bacteria, biofilm, tissue, and thermal ablation. The laser fiber tips also displayed significant tip degradation after use, which might affect efficacy. Conclusions: In this in vitro study, laser-activated irrigation using Er;Cr:YSGG technology and UAI were inefficient in eliminating pulp tissue from difficult-to-reach areas and Enterococcus faecalis from infected root canals.