Cargando…

Endodontic Rotary Systems: Comparison between Gentlefile and Pro Taper Universal for removal of Enterococcus faecalis

BACKGROUND: As a resistant bacterium species in infected root canals, Enterococcus faecalis needs to be removed in any endodontic treatment. So, we aimed to compare the effectiveness of two rotary systems, Gentlefile and Pro Taper Universal, in removing Enterococcus faecalis (E. faecalis) from the i...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Godiny, Mostafa, Mohammadi, Bahare, Norooznezhad, Maryam, Chalabi, Maryam
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Medicina Oral S.L. 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10155944/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37152499
http://dx.doi.org/10.4317/jced.60147
_version_ 1785036434721210368
author Godiny, Mostafa
Mohammadi, Bahare
Norooznezhad, Maryam
Chalabi, Maryam
author_facet Godiny, Mostafa
Mohammadi, Bahare
Norooznezhad, Maryam
Chalabi, Maryam
author_sort Godiny, Mostafa
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: As a resistant bacterium species in infected root canals, Enterococcus faecalis needs to be removed in any endodontic treatment. So, we aimed to compare the effectiveness of two rotary systems, Gentlefile and Pro Taper Universal, in removing Enterococcus faecalis (E. faecalis) from the infected root canal system. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Forty single-root premolar teeth were collected and randomly divided into two groups: Gentlefile (n=18) and Pro Taper Universal (n=18). In addition, four teeth were used as a negative control. The root canals were prepared and infected with E. faecalis and incubated for 4 weeks. Samples were obtained from the root canal immediately before and after instrumentation. A reduction in bacteria was determined by the colony count method. RESULTS: Colony numbers of E. faecalis were significantly different before and after instrumentation in all groups (p<0.001). Furthermore, Gentlefile group illustrated a higher percentage of bacterial reduction (96.1%) compared to Pro Taper Universal group (90%). Accordingly, Gentlefile group was found to be significantly (p<0.001) more effective in decreasing bacterial populations than Pro Taper Universal group. CONCLUSIONS: Although both rotary systems were highly effective in bacterial reduction from root canals, Gentlefile demonstrated better bacterial reduction percentage from root canals than Pro Taper Universal. Key words:Enterococcus faecalis, Gentlefile, Pro Taper Universal, Rotary systems.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10155944
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher Medicina Oral S.L.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-101559442023-05-04 Endodontic Rotary Systems: Comparison between Gentlefile and Pro Taper Universal for removal of Enterococcus faecalis Godiny, Mostafa Mohammadi, Bahare Norooznezhad, Maryam Chalabi, Maryam J Clin Exp Dent Research BACKGROUND: As a resistant bacterium species in infected root canals, Enterococcus faecalis needs to be removed in any endodontic treatment. So, we aimed to compare the effectiveness of two rotary systems, Gentlefile and Pro Taper Universal, in removing Enterococcus faecalis (E. faecalis) from the infected root canal system. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Forty single-root premolar teeth were collected and randomly divided into two groups: Gentlefile (n=18) and Pro Taper Universal (n=18). In addition, four teeth were used as a negative control. The root canals were prepared and infected with E. faecalis and incubated for 4 weeks. Samples were obtained from the root canal immediately before and after instrumentation. A reduction in bacteria was determined by the colony count method. RESULTS: Colony numbers of E. faecalis were significantly different before and after instrumentation in all groups (p<0.001). Furthermore, Gentlefile group illustrated a higher percentage of bacterial reduction (96.1%) compared to Pro Taper Universal group (90%). Accordingly, Gentlefile group was found to be significantly (p<0.001) more effective in decreasing bacterial populations than Pro Taper Universal group. CONCLUSIONS: Although both rotary systems were highly effective in bacterial reduction from root canals, Gentlefile demonstrated better bacterial reduction percentage from root canals than Pro Taper Universal. Key words:Enterococcus faecalis, Gentlefile, Pro Taper Universal, Rotary systems. Medicina Oral S.L. 2023-04-01 /pmc/articles/PMC10155944/ /pubmed/37152499 http://dx.doi.org/10.4317/jced.60147 Text en Copyright: © 2023 Medicina Oral S.L. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.5/This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Research
Godiny, Mostafa
Mohammadi, Bahare
Norooznezhad, Maryam
Chalabi, Maryam
Endodontic Rotary Systems: Comparison between Gentlefile and Pro Taper Universal for removal of Enterococcus faecalis
title Endodontic Rotary Systems: Comparison between Gentlefile and Pro Taper Universal for removal of Enterococcus faecalis
title_full Endodontic Rotary Systems: Comparison between Gentlefile and Pro Taper Universal for removal of Enterococcus faecalis
title_fullStr Endodontic Rotary Systems: Comparison between Gentlefile and Pro Taper Universal for removal of Enterococcus faecalis
title_full_unstemmed Endodontic Rotary Systems: Comparison between Gentlefile and Pro Taper Universal for removal of Enterococcus faecalis
title_short Endodontic Rotary Systems: Comparison between Gentlefile and Pro Taper Universal for removal of Enterococcus faecalis
title_sort endodontic rotary systems: comparison between gentlefile and pro taper universal for removal of enterococcus faecalis
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10155944/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37152499
http://dx.doi.org/10.4317/jced.60147
work_keys_str_mv AT godinymostafa endodonticrotarysystemscomparisonbetweengentlefileandprotaperuniversalforremovalofenterococcusfaecalis
AT mohammadibahare endodonticrotarysystemscomparisonbetweengentlefileandprotaperuniversalforremovalofenterococcusfaecalis
AT norooznezhadmaryam endodonticrotarysystemscomparisonbetweengentlefileandprotaperuniversalforremovalofenterococcusfaecalis
AT chalabimaryam endodonticrotarysystemscomparisonbetweengentlefileandprotaperuniversalforremovalofenterococcusfaecalis