Background: Irrigation of the canal system permits removal of residual tissue in the canal anatomy that cannot be reached by instrumentation of the main canals so the aim of this study was to compare and evaluate the efficiency of conventional irrigation system, endoactivator sonic irrigation system,P5 Newtron Satelec passive ultrasonic irrigation and Endovac irrigation system in removing of dentin debris at three levels of root canals and to compare the percentage of dentin debris among the three levels for each irrigation system. Materials and methods: Forty extracted premolars with approximately straight single root canals were randomly distributed into 4 tested groups of 10 teeth each. All canals were prepared with Protaper Universal hand files to size #F4, and irrigated with 2.5% NaOCI 1 ml between files and 5ml for 60 seconds as a final irrigant by different irrigation devices; group one, by using conventional system; group two, by using Endoactivator sonic irrigation system, group three, by using Satelec Passive Ultrasonic irrigation and group four by using the Endovac system. After the final irrigation, the roots were split longitudinally and photographed with a digital microscope. The roots were magnified to 100X; a percentage of debris was calculated for the apical 0-3, middle 3-6 and coronal 6-9 mm. The debris score was calculated as a percentage of the total area of the canal that contained debris as determined by pixels in Adobe PhotoshopCS5. Data were analyzed statistically by ANOVA and LSD at 5% significant level. Results: when comparing the debris remaining, the Endovac, Endoactivator and Satelec groups showed significantly less debris than the conventional group at all three levels (p < 0.01). The Endovac group showed significantly less debris than the Endoactivator group at middle and coronal levels while no significant difference found between the Endovac system and Endoactivator system at apical level. The apical 0-3 mm showed significantly more debris than both the middle and coronal level for all groups. Conclusion: The EndoVac system showed a higher cleaning capacity of the canal at all levels, followed by the protocols that used Endoactivator sonic irrigation system. The conventional irrigation system with maxi-i-probe needles showed inferior results. The apical three millimeters showed a greater amount of debris than the 3-9 millimetres from the working length, regardless of the irrigation device used.