Published: November 26, 2025
A completed trial investigates different irrigation methods for treating apical periodontitis, offering insights for clinical teams and regulatory professionals. Sponsored by Hilal Çuhadar Beşiroğlu, the study compares three techniques—Sonic Activation Irrigation, Passive Ultrasonic Irrigation (PUI), and Conventional Needle Irrigation—to determine their effectiveness in promoting healing. This analysis supports advancing procedural standards in endodontics to meet regulatory compliance.
What changed?
A clinical trial completed under the sponsorship of Hilal Çuhadar Beşiroğlu addresses the healing impact of distinct endodontic irrigation methods on apical periodontitis. Sonic activation, ultrasonic activation (PUI), and conventional needle irrigation were evaluated in terms of performance and clinical effectiveness.
This serves regulatory professionals aiming for compliance with evidence-based device evaluations and safety standards in endodontics.
Study details and analysis
Background of apical periodontitis
Apical periodontitis is a prevalent inflammatory condition affecting the tissues surrounding the apex of a tooth post-endodontic infection. Recovery relies on effective cleaning and decontamination of the root canal system to prevent bacterial reinfection.
Examining treatment techniques
The trial analyzed three irrigation techniques:
- Sonic Activation Irrigation: Utilizes sound waves to enhance cleaning through agitation, promoting deeper penetration of irrigation solutions.
- Passive Ultrasonic Irrigation (PUI): Employs ultrasonic energy for thorough cleaning and debris removal via acoustic streaming within the root canal system.
- Conventional Needle Irrigation: A broadly used manual method requiring precision but offering less dynamic fluid movement compared to advanced tools.
Clinical conclusions
The findings highlight comparative strengths and weaknesses of each method. Sonic and ultrasonic techniques may promise greater cleaning capabilities, facilitating quicker recovery times. These insights are pivotal for regulations ensuring medical devices align with therapeutic performance benchmarks.
FAQs
1. What is the primary goal of the study?
The trial focused on measuring the healing efficiencies of specific irrigation methods in treating apical periodontitis.
2. Why are sonic and ultrasonic methods significant?
They provide enhanced fluid dynamics essential for better debridement and biofilm removal compared to conventional techniques.
3. Who might benefit from these findings?
Regulatory and clinical teams in endodontics can use this data for device approvals and improving therapeutic approaches.
Conclusion
The study offers evidence supporting advanced irrigation methods that may enhance apical periodontitis recovery. It underscores critical comparisons that help refine procedural and regulatory goals. Professionals involved in medical device regulation or endodontic practice should evaluate these findings for actionable improvements.
Disclaimer
This content provides professional information and should not be considered legal advice. Consult appropriate legal and regulatory sources before implementing recommendations.
For full information about the announcement, see the link below.
https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT07249450?term=medical+device