Search Dental Tribune

Irrigating the root canal: A case report

Post-operative radiograph (Image: Dr Vittorio Franco, UK and Italy)
Dr Vittorio Franco, UK and Italy

Dr Vittorio Franco, UK and Italy

Mon. 22 January 2018

save

The patient reported on in this article is a student in dentistry and his parents are both dentists. They referred their son to a good endodontist, who then referred the case to me. As always, peers are more than welcome in either of my practices, in Rome and London, so when I treated this case, I had three dentists watching me, a future dentist on the chair, placing a great deal of pressure on me.

The 22-year-old male patient had a history of trauma to his maxillary incisors and arrived at my practice with symptoms related to tooth #21. The tooth, opened in an emergency by the patient’s mother, was tender when prodded, with a moderate level of sensitivity on the respective buccal gingiva. Sensitivity tests were negative for the other central incisor (tooth #12 was positive), and a periapical radiograph showed radiolucency in the periapical areas of both of the central incisors. The apices of these teeth were quite wide and the length of teeth appeared to exceed 25 mm.

My treatment plan was as follows: root canal therapy with two apical plugs with a calcium silicate-based bioactive cement. The patient provided his consent for the treatment of the affected tooth and asked to have the other treated in a subsequent visit.

After isolating with a rubber dam, I removed the temporary filling, and then the entire pulp chamber roof with a low-speed round drill. The working length was immediately evaluated using an electronic apex locator and a 31 mm K-type file. The working length was determined to be 28 mm.

As can be seen in the photographs, the canal was actually quite wide, so I decided to only use an irrigating solution and not a shaping instrument. Root canals are usually shaped so that there will be enough space for proper irrigation and a proper shape for obturation. This usually means giving these canals a tapered shape to ensure good control when obturating. With open apices, a conical shape is not needed, and often there is enough space for placing the irrigating solution deep and close to the apex.

I decided to use only some syringes containing 5 per cent sodium hypochlorite and EDDY, a sonic tip produced by VDW, for delivery of the cleaning solution and to promote turbulence in the endodontic space and shear stress on the canal walls in order to remove the necrotic tissue faster and more effectively. After a rinse with sodium hypochlorite, the sonic tip was moved to and from the working length of the canal for 30 seconds. This procedure was repeated until the sodium hypochlorite seemed to become ineffective, was clear and had no bubbles. I did not use EDTA, as no debris or smear layer was produced.

I suctioned the sodium hypochlorite, checked the working length with a paper point and then obturated the canal with a of 3 mm in thickness plug of bioactive cement. I then took a radiograph before obturating the rest of the canal with warm gutta-percha. I used a compomer as a temporary filling material.

The symptoms resolved, so I conducted the second treatment only after some months, when the tooth #11 became tender. Tooth #21 had healed. I performed the same procedure and obtained the same outcome (the four-month follow-up radiograph showed healing).

Editorial note: A complete list of references are available from the publisher. This article was published in roots - international magazine of endodontology No. 04/2017.

One thought on “Irrigating the root canal: A case report

  1. The ultimate reason why root canals fail is bacteria. If our mouths were sterile there would be no decay or infection, and damaged teeth could, in ways, repair themselves. So although we can attribute nearly all root canal failure to the presence of bacteria, I will discuss five common reasons why root canals fail, and why at least four of them are mostly preventable.

To post a reply please login or register

The steady rise of dental tourism and the risks of cheap treatment abroad

A new report by the BBC has shown that dental tourism continues to increase and also underscores the vital role played by dentists in providing careful advice about the risks of such treatment. (Image: krakenimages.com/Adobe Stock)

Tue. 28 October 2025

save

LONDON, England: Driven by the NHS dental crisis, an increasing number of UK patients seeking cheaper dental work overseas are encountering unexpected complications, according to a recent feature by BBC News. While the initial outlay may appear attractive, many are discovering that follow-up care and regulatory protection can be problematic and that long-term costs can be significant. For dentists at home, it is imperative that prudent advice about these risks be provided to patients considering such treatment overseas.

The report highlights the growing trend of dental tourism—often drawing patients with lower costs and the promise of a quicker smile transformation. However, the article emphasises the risks associated with this choice: when things go wrong, returning home often means navigating care gaps and limited avenues of recourse.

As reported on by Dental Tribune International, dental tourism among UK patients, particularly to countries such as Turkey, has been steadily on the rise since the lifting of travel restrictions associated with the COVID-19 pandemic. UK dental professionals are increasingly seeing the aftermath of these overseas treatments—including poorly fitted work, infections, implant failure and the need for corrective procedures. Many patients under-estimate the difficulty of managing complications once they are back in the UK. Without the same legal and regulatory protections as domestic treatment, patients may find themselves unable to claim for damages, contact the original practitioner or obtain treatment assurance from abroad.

Cost-savings can prove illusory. While treatment fees might be lower overseas, subsequent remedial work undertaken in the UK often costs far more than what a routine local treatment would have, something also experienced by Australian dental tourists. Clinics abroad may offer enticing promotional packages—covering flights, accommodation and dental work—but may not adequately address postoperative care, continuity of treatment, or the complexities of follow-up and emergency support.

From a regulatory perspective, UK bodies are increasingly urging patients to ensure that they thoroughly research the credentials of the overseas provider and understand the full treatment plan, including aftercare, and are advising patients that UK clinics may refuse to accept responsibility for work done abroad. The article calls for better public awareness of these issues and suggests that patients factor in hidden costs and risks—not just the headline price.

For dental professionals, the growing prevalence of complications linked to dental tourism underscores the importance of patient education, continuity of care and professional collaboration. While the General Dental Council and the Dental Defence Society provide guidance on managing patients treated abroad, this advice remains largely general in scope.  There is a need for detailed, standardised professional protocols—covering documentation, consent and post-treatment management—to support consistent and ethically responsible care for patients returning from overseas treatment.

Topics:
Tags:
To post a reply please login or register
advertisement