Irrigation is considered the primary means of cleaning and disinfection of the root canal system. The purpose of this review was to set the framework for the obstacles that irrigation needs to overcome, to critically appraise currently used irrigants and irrigation methods, to highlight knowledge gaps and methodological limitations in the available studies and to provide directions for future developments. Organization of bacteria in biofilms located in anatomic intricacies of the root canal system and the difficulty to eliminate them is the main challenge for irrigants. Sodium hypochlorite remains the primary irrigant of choice, but it needs to be supplemented by a chelator. Delivery of the irrigants using a syringe and needle and activation by an ultrasonic file are the most popular irrigation methods. There is no evidence that any adjunct irrigation method, including ultrasonic activation, can improve the long‐term outcome of root canal treatment beyond what can be achieved by instrumentation and syringe irrigation. It is necessary to redefine the research priorities in this field and investigate in greater depth the penetration of the irrigants, their effect on the biofilm and the long‐term treatment outcome. New studies must also focus on clinically relevant comparisons, avoid methodological flaws and have sufficiently large sample sizes to reach reliable conclusions. Future multidisciplinary efforts combining the knowledge from basic sciences such as Chemistry, Microbiology and Fluid Dynamics may lead to more effective antimicrobials and improved activation methods to bring them closer to the residual biofilm in the root canal system.
Irrigation plays an essential role in root canal treatment. The purpose of this narrative review was to critically appraise the experimental methods and models used to study irrigants and irrigation systems and to provide directions for future research. Studies on the antimicrobial effect of irrigants should use mature multispecies biofilms grown on dentine or inside root canals and should combine at least two complementary evaluation methods. Dissolution of pulp tissue remnants should be examined in the presence of dentine and, preferably, inside human root canals. Micro‐computed tomography is currently the method of choice for the assessment of accumulated dentine debris and their removal. A combination of experiments in transparent root canals and numerical modeling is needed to address irrigant penetration. Finally, models to evaluate irrigant extrusion through the apical foramen should simulate the periapical tissues and provide quantitative data on the amount of extruded irrigant. Mimicking the in vivo conditions as close as possible and standardization of the specimens and experimental protocols are universal requirements irrespective of the surrogate endpoint studied. Obsolete and unrealistic models must be abandoned in favour of more appropriate and valid ones that have more direct application and translation to clinical Endodontics.