ANTI-MICROBIAL ACTIVITY OF IRRIGANTS ON ENTEROCOCCUS FAECALIS: IN-VITRO ANALYSIS
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.61841/fvvzeh78Keywords:
Antimicrobial, Chlorhexidine Gluconate, ChloroQuick, Enterococcus faecalis, Sodium HypochloriteAbstract
INTRODUCTION: The contribution of microorganisms to the development of pulpal and periapical disease has been well documented. The bacteria associated with primary endodontic infections are mixed but are predominantly gram-negative anaerobic rods, whereas the bacteria associated with secondary infection comprise only one or a few bacterial species-the most important of which is Enterococcus faecalis. The purpose of this study was to compare and evaluate the antimicrobial efficacy of ChloroQuick with Sodium Hypochlorite and 2% Chlorhexidine gluconate on E.faecalis. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Thirty extracted human lower bicuspids with a single root canal, checked by radiographs were selected. E. faecalis suspensions were injected into the canals of all teeth using sterile insulin syringes under aseptic conditions. In group 1, 10 root canals were irrigated with 0.9% NaOCl In group 2, 10 root canals were irrigated with ChloroQuick. In group 3, 10 root canals were irrigated with 2% CHX. Sterile paper points were selected to sample the bacteria from root canals after cleaning and shaping the root canal. The paper points were left in the canal for 1 minute and the samples were transported into plates containing TSA with 5% sheep blood and placed in an incubator at 37 degree celsius for 48 hours. The samples were retrieved from the incubator after 48 hours to be evaluated bacteriologically as to the presence of microorganisms and observation of the colonies formed. RESULTS: Bacterial growth was seen only in one sample of ChloroQuick, but in 3 of CHX group and 2 of NaOCl group. Chi-Square test showed no statistical difference between groups. CONCLUSION: Based on the results of this study, it seems that all three solutions have acceptable antimicrobial effect on E. faecalis.
Downloads
References
[1] Gomes BPFA, Lilley JD, Brucker DB (1996) Variations in the susceptibilities of components of endodontic microflora to biomechanical procedures. International Endodontic Journal 29, 235-41.
[2] Grahnen H, Krasse B (1963) The effect of instrumentation and flushing of non-vital teeth in endodontic therapy. Odontologisk Revy 14, 167-77.
[3] Heling B, Shapira J (1978) Roentgenologic and clinical evaluation of endodontically treated teeth, with
or without negative culture. Quintessence International 11, 79-84.
[4] Heling I, Chandler NP (1998) Antibacterial effect of irrigant combinations within dentinal tubules.
International Endodontic Journal 31, 8-14.
[5] Ingle JE, Zeldow BJ (1958) An evaluation of mechanical instrumentation and the negative culture in
endodontic therapy. Journal of the American Dental Association 57, 471.
[6] Gomes, B. P. et al. Microbial analysis of canals of root-filled teeth with periapical lesions using
polymerase chain reaction. J Endod. 34, 537–540 (2008).
[7] Sundqvist, G., Figdor, D., Persson, S. & Sjögren, U. Microbiologic analysis of teeth with failed
endodontic treatment and the outcome of conservative re-treatment. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral
Radiol Endod. 85, 86–93 (1998).
[8] Figdor, D., Davies, J. K. & Sundqvist, G. Starvation survival, growth and recovery of Enterococcus
faecalis in human serum. Oral Microbiol Immunol. 18, 234–239 (2003).
[9] Neelakantan P, Subbarao C, Sharma S, Subbarao CV, Garcia-Godoy F, Gutmann JL. Effectiveness of curcumin against Enterococcus faecalis biofilm. Acta Odontologica Scandinavica. 2013 Nov 1;71(6):1453-7.
[10] Baca, P., Mendoza-Llamas, M. L., Arias-Moliz, M. T., González-Rodríguez, M. P. & Ferrer-Luque, C. M. Residual effectiveness of final irrigation regimens on Enteroccus faecalis-infected root canals. J Endod. 37, 1121–1123 (2011).
[11] Marickar RF, Geetha RV, Neelakantan P. Efficacy of contemporary and novel intracanal medicaments against Enterococcus faecalis. Journal of Clinical Pediatric Dentistry. 2014 Sep 1;39(1):47-50.
[12] Kho, P. & Baumgartner, J. C. A comparison of the antimicrobial efficacy of NaOCl/Biopure MTAD versus NaOCl/EDTA against Enterococcus faecalis. J Endod. 32, 652–655 (2006).
[13] Torabinejad, M., Shabahang, S., Aprecio, R. M. & Kettering, J. D. The antimicrobial effect of MTAD: an in vitro investigation. J Endod. 29, 400–403 (2003).
[14] Torabinejad, M. et al. A new solution for the removal of the smear layer. J Endod. 29, 170–175 (2003).
[15] Ferrer-Luque, C. M., Conde-Ortiz, A., Arias-Moliz, M. T., Valderrama, M. J. & Baca, P. Residual activity of chelating agents and their combinations with cetrimide on root canals infected with Enterococcus faecalis. J Endod. 38, 826–828 (2012).
[16] Khademi, A. A., Mohammadi, Z. & Havaee, A. Evaluation of the antibacterial substantivity of several intra-canal agents. Aust Endod J. 32, 112–115 (2006).
[17] Vianna, M. E. et al. In vitro evaluation of the antimicrobial activity of chlorhexidine and sodium hypochlorite. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 97, 79–84 (2004).
[18] Dai, L. et al. The effect of QMix, an experimental antibacterial root canal irrigant, on removal of canal wall smear layer and debris. J Endod. 37, 80–84 (2011).
[19] Costerton, J. W., Stewart, P. S. & Greenberg, E. P. Bacterial biofilms: a common cause of persistent infections. Science 284, 1318–1322 (1999).
[20] Gilmore, M. S. The enterococci: pathogenesis, molecular biology, and antibiotic resistance. (ASM Press, 2002).
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2020 AUTHOR
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
You are free to:
- Share — copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format for any purpose, even commercially.
- Adapt — remix, transform, and build upon the material for any purpose, even commercially.
- The licensor cannot revoke these freedoms as long as you follow the license terms.
Under the following terms:
- Attribution — You must give appropriate credit , provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made . You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use.
- No additional restrictions — You may not apply legal terms or technological measures that legally restrict others from doing anything the license permits.
Notices:
You do not have to comply with the license for elements of the material in the public domain or where your use is permitted by an applicable exception or limitation .
No warranties are given. The license may not give you all of the permissions necessary for your intended use. For example, other rights such as publicity, privacy, or moral rights may limit how you use the material.
