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

Review highlights gaps in undergraduate implant education in UK and Ireland

A new review has highlighted the need for clearer curriculum guidance and greater clinical exposure in undergraduate dental implantology education in the UK and Ireland. (Image: ShapikMedia/Adobe Stock)

Wed. 20 May 2026

save

BRISTOL, England: Although dental implantology has traditionally been regarded as a postgraduate subject, graduating dentists increasingly need to understand core aspects of implant therapy, including monitoring and maintenance of implants and peri-implant tissue. A new review by UK researchers has found that undergraduate dental implantology education in the UK and Ireland has improved markedly over the past 40 years but that wide variations remain. The authors argued that educators need clearer guidance on curricula content, teaching methods and student assessment.

Drawing on surveys and consensus documents from the past four decades, the authors reported that implant dentistry is now embedded in dental school curricula in the UK and Ireland. Earlier surveys found that implant teaching was often limited to lectures, whereas more recent data shows greater use of simulation and some clinical teaching.

Nevertheless, the review found continued inconsistency between dental schools. In the most recent UK-focused survey, published in 2022, all eight dental schools that responded addressed implant dentistry in lectures and six offered preclinical simulation training. However, only one reported providing observation of restorative implant procedures, one had students restore implants and two provided observation of implant surgery. The reported barriers to broader implementation included cost, lack of time within already crowded curricula, limited teaching staff expertise and the need for staff training.

The authors also argued that UK undergraduate implantology education appears to lag behind provision in some other countries in respect of teaching hours, variety of teaching methods and provision of clinical experience. They cited European survey data showing an average of 74 hours of undergraduate implant-related education, whereas UK schools were reported to provide between 10 and 20 hours.

Implications for general practice

The authors highlighted the growing number and complexity of implant cases presenting in general dental practice. In England, the 2021 Adult Oral Health Survey found that 5% of adults reported having a dental implant, which the review said equated to an estimated 2.8 million individuals. These developments make implant maintenance and early recognition of complications increasingly relevant to primary dental care. The authors also noted that undergraduate exposure to implantology may influence later clinical confidence and practice patterns, including whether dentists discuss implants as a treatment option, make appropriate referrals and provide maintenance.

The review also places these findings in the context of a wider change in UK dental education. Preparing for Practice was the General Dental Council’s previous statement of learning outcomes for registration, setting out the knowledge, skills and attributes expected of new dental professionals. It has now been superseded by the Safe Practitioner Framework, which states that graduating dentists should be able to explain the use of implants as a treatment option, including outcomes, limitations and risks. The General Dental Council says that all education providers are expected to align their programmes with the framework by the 2030–2031 academic year.

The authors called for continued curriculum guidance on content, teaching environments, learning styles and assessment to support the necessary progression of undergraduate implant education in UK dental schools. They concluded that the current period of transition presents “a timely opportunity to reflect on [undergraduate] implant education and establish how further improvements can be made”.

The review, titled “Undergraduate dental implantology education in the United Kingdom – looking to the past to plan for the future”, was published online on 8 May 2026 in the British Dental Journal.

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