Experiments in Fluids

, Volume 53, Issue 6, pp 1841–1853 | Cite as

Role of the confinement of a root canal on jet impingement during endodontic irrigation

  • B. Verhaagen
  • C. Boutsioukis
  • G. L. Heijnen
  • L. W. M. van der Sluis
  • M. Versluis
Research Article


During a root canal treatment the root canal is irrigated with an antimicrobial fluid, commonly performed with a needle and a syringe. Irrigation of a root canal with two different types of needles can be modeled as an impinging axisymmetric or non-axisymmetric jet. These jets are investigated experimentally with high-speed Particle Imaging Velocimetry, inside and outside the confinement (concave surface) of a root canal, and compared to theoretical predictions for these jets. The efficacy of irrigation fluid refreshment with respect to the typical reaction time of the antimicrobial fluid with a biofilm is characterized with a non-dimensional Damköhler number. The pressure that these jets induce on a wall or at the apex of the root canal is also measured. The axisymmetric jet is found to be stable and its velocity agrees with the theoretical prediction for this type of jet, however, a confinement causes instabilities to the jet. The confinement of the root canal has a pronounced influence on the flow, for both the axisymmetric and non-axisymmetric jet, by reducing the velocities by one order of magnitude and increasing the pressure at the apex. The non-axisymmetric jet inside the confinement shows a cascade of eddies with decreasing velocities, which at the apex does not provide adequate irrigation fluid refreshment.


Particle Image Velocimetry Root Canal Computational Fluid Dynamic Model Root Canal Treatment Root Canal Wall 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

List of symbols


velocity in r and y direction


fluid density


fluid dynamic viscosity


jet radius, diameter


flow rate

\(Re = \frac{v D}{\nu}\)

Reynolds number


distance between the needle tip and the apex or wall


distance from the plate or apex where stagnation flow holds


angle under which flow exits the needle


(root canal) cone angle


eigenvalue of the stream function inside a cavity



The authors would like to thank Gerrit de Bruin and Leen van Wijngaarden for their help in calculating the theoretical free jet flow profile. BV is funded through project number 07498 of the Dutch Technology Foundation STW; CB has a Marie Curie Intra-European Fellowship for Career Development.


  1. Adcock JM, Sidow SJ, Looney SW, Liu Y, McNally K, Lindsey K, Tay FR (2011) Histologic evaluation of canal and isthmus debridement efficacies of two different irrigant delivery techniques in a closed system. J Endod 37(4):544–548CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Amato M, Vanoni-Heineken I, Hecker H, Weiger R (2011) Curved versus straight root canals: the benefit of activated irrigation techniques on dentin debris removal. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 111(4):529–534CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Baker R (1947) Studies on the reaction between sodium hypochlorite and proteins. Biochemistry 41:337–342Google Scholar
  4. Boutsioukis C, Lambrianidis T, Kastrinakis E, Bekiaroglou P (2007) Measurement of pressure and flow rates during irrigation of a root canal ex vivo with three endodontic needles. Int Endod J 40:504–513CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Boutsioukis C, Lambrianidis T, Kastrinakis E (2009) Irrigant flow within a prepared root canal using various flow rates: a computational fluid dynamics study. Int Endod J 42:144–155CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Boutsioukis C, Verhaagen B, Versluis M, Kastrinakis E, Wesselink PR, Vander Sluis LWM (2010) Evaluation of irrigant flow in the root canal using different needle types by an unsteady computational fluid dynamics model. J Endod 36(5):875–879CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Boutsioukis C, Gogos C, Verhaagen B, Versluis M, Kastrinakis E, Vander Sluis LWM (2010) The effect of apical preparation size on irrigant flow in root canals evaluated using an unsteady computational fluid dynamics model. Int Endod J 43:874–881CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Boutsioukis C, Gogos C, Verhaagen B, Versluis M, Kastrinakis E, Vander Sluis LWM (2010) The effect of root canal taper on the irrigant flow: evaluation using an unsteady computational fluid dynamics model. Int Endod J 43:909–916CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Boutsioukis C, Verhaagen B, Versluis M, Kastrinakis E, Vander Sluis LWM (2010) Irrigant flow in the root canal: experimental validation of an unsteady computational fluid dynamics model using high-speed imaging. Int Endod J 43:393–403CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Cohen S, Hargreaves KM (2006) Pathways of the pulp, 9th edn. Mosby Elsevier, AmsterdamGoogle Scholar
  11. Cornaro C, Fleischer AS, Goldstein RJ (1999) Flow visualization of a round jet impinging on cylindrical surfaces. Exp Thermal Fluid Sci 20:66–78CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Deshpande MD, Vaishnav RN (1982) Submerged laminar jet impingement on a plane. J Fluid Mech 114:213–236zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Gao Y, Haapasalo M, Shen Y, Wu H, Li B, Ruse ND, Zhou X (2009) Development and validation of a three-dimensional computational fluid dynamics model of root canal irrigation. J Endod 35(9):1282–1287CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Gau C, Shen CH, Wang ZB (2009) Peculiar phenomenon of micro-free-jet flow. Phys Fluids 21(092001):1–13Google Scholar
  15. Glauert MB (1956) The wall jet. J Fluid Mech 1(6):625–643MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Haapasalo M, Endal U, Zandi H, Coil JM (2005) Eradication of endodontic infection by instrumentation and irrigation solutions. Endodontic Topics 10:77–102CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Hülsmann M, Rödig T, Nordmeyer S (2009) Complications during root canal irrigation. Endod Topics 16:27–63CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Kahn FH, Rosenberg PA, Gliksberg J (1995) An in vitro evaluation of the irrigating characteristics of ultrasonic and subsonic handpieces and irrigating needles and probes. J Endod 21(5):277–280CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Kent EF (1999) Flow visualization experiments in a v-shaped channel bounded by a cylindrical surface. J Phys Soc Jpn 68(6):1887–1890CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Meinhart C, Wereley S, Gray M (2000) Volume illumination for two-dimensional particle image velocimetry. Meas Sci Technol 11:809–814CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Moffatt HK (1964) Viscous and resistive eddies near a sharp corner. J Fluid Mech 18:1–18zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Moorer WR, Wesselink PR (1982) Factors promoting the tissue dissolving capability of sodium hypochlorite. Int Endod J 15:187–196CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Moser JB, Heuer MA (1982) Forces and efficacy in endodontic irrigation systems. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 53(4):425–428Google Scholar
  24. Nair P (2004) Pathegenesis of apical periodontitis and the causes of endodontic failures. Crit Rev Oral Biol Med 15(6):348–381CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Paqué F, Boessler C, Zehnder M (2011) Accumulated hard tissue debris levels in mesial roots of mandibular molars after sequential irrigation steps. Int Endod J 44(2):148–153CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Phares DJ, Smedley GT, Flagan RC (2000a) The inviscid impingement of a jet with arbitrary velocity profile. Phys Fluids 12(8):2046–2055CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Phares DJ, Smedley GT, Flagan RC (2000b) The wall shear stress produced by the normal impingement of a jet on a flat surface. J Fluid Mech 418:351–375zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Raffel M, Willert CE, Wereley ST, Kompenhans J (2007) Particle imaging velocimetry—a practical guide, 2nd edn. Springer, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  29. Rubel A (1980) Computations of jet impingement on a flat surface. AIAA J 182(2):168–175CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Schlichting H, Gersten K (2000) Boundary-layer theory, 8th edn. Springer, BerlinzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  31. Sena N, Gomes BP, Vianna ME, Berber VB, Zaia AA, Ferraz CCR, Souza-Filho FJ (2006) In vitro antimicrobial activity of sodium hypochlorite and chlorhexidine against selected single-species biofilms. Int Endod J 39:878–885CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Shankar PN, Deshpande MD (2000) Fluid mechanics in the driven cavity. Annu Rev Fluid Mech 32:93–136MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Taneda S (1979) Visualization of separating Stokes flows. J Phys Soc Jpn 46(6):1935–1942CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Taylor G (1966) Oblique impact on a plane surface. Philos Trans Royal Soc Lond Series A Math Phys Sci 260(1110):96–100CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Won Y, Wang EN, Goodson KE, Wenny TW (2011) 3-D visualization of flow in microscale jet impingement systems. Int J Therm Sci 50:325–331CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • B. Verhaagen
    • 1
  • C. Boutsioukis
    • 2
  • G. L. Heijnen
    • 1
  • L. W. M. van der Sluis
    • 3
  • M. Versluis
    • 1
  1. 1.Physics of Fluids Group, Faculty of Science and Technology and Institute for Biomedical Technology and Technical Medicine MIRAUniversity of TwenteEnschedeThe Netherlands
  2. 2.Physics of Fluids Group, Faculty of Science and Technology and MESA+ Institute for NanotechnologyUniversity of TwenteEnschedeThe Netherlands
  3. 3.Department of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, Faculty of DentistryPaul Sabatier UniversityToulouse CEDEX 9France

Personalised recommendations