Cargando…

An analysis in vivo of intracanal bacterial load before and after chemo-mechanical preparation: A comparative analysis of two irrigants and two activation techniques

BACKGROUND: The goals of this randomized double-blind trial were to assess the antimicrobial activity in vivo of Sodium hypochlorite (NaOCl) vs. chlorhexidine gluconate (CHX) used in combination either with EndoActivator® or IRRI S® files in patients with apical periodontitis. MATERIAL AND METHODS:...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Rico-Romano, Cristina, Zubizarreta-Macho, Álvaro, Baquero-Artigao, María-Rosario, Mena-Álvarez, Jesús
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Medicina Oral S.L. 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4739376/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26855714
http://dx.doi.org/10.4317/jced.52585
_version_ 1782413736421621760
author Rico-Romano, Cristina
Zubizarreta-Macho, Álvaro
Baquero-Artigao, María-Rosario
Mena-Álvarez, Jesús
author_facet Rico-Romano, Cristina
Zubizarreta-Macho, Álvaro
Baquero-Artigao, María-Rosario
Mena-Álvarez, Jesús
author_sort Rico-Romano, Cristina
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The goals of this randomized double-blind trial were to assess the antimicrobial activity in vivo of Sodium hypochlorite (NaOCl) vs. chlorhexidine gluconate (CHX) used in combination either with EndoActivator® or IRRI S® files in patients with apical periodontitis. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A total of 120 patients with apical periodontitis (in single or multiple root canals) were randomly assigned to the four irrigation protocols outlined below: Group A: 5.25% sodium hypochlorite (NaOCl) + EndoActivator®; Group B: 5.25% NaOCl + IRRI S® files; Group C: 2% chlorhexidine gluconate (CHX) + EndoActivator®; Group D: 2% CHX + IRRI S® files. Paper points were used to collect microbiological samples before (1A samples) and after (1B samples) irrigation. Viable colony-forming units (CFU) were quantified twice: (1) without speciation, and (2) only for Enterococcus Faecalis(EF). Statistical analysis was performed using SPSS 22.0 for Windows. RESULTS: No significant differences were observed between NaOCl and CHX in the reduction of CFU; in fact, reduction was < 93% for the two irrigants. Conversely, statistically significant differences were found between the two activation techniques (sonic and ultrasonic) in the reduction of Enterococcus Faecalis(EF). Thus, the effectiveness of ultrasonic activation was significantly higher (< 93%; p=0.012) as compared to sonic activation. Following the combination of the two irrigants with the two activation techniques (groups A, B, C and D), significant differences were observed between group A and B (p=0.025) in the reduction of EF populations, reaching up to 94%. CONCLUSIONS: NaClO and CHX are effective in reducing intracanal bacterial load. Ultrasonic activation is the most effective activation technique in reducing EF populations. Key words:Chlorhexidine gluconate, sodium hypochlorite, ultrasonic irrigation, sonic irrigation, apical periodontitis, Enterococcus faecalis.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4739376
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher Medicina Oral S.L.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-47393762016-02-05 An analysis in vivo of intracanal bacterial load before and after chemo-mechanical preparation: A comparative analysis of two irrigants and two activation techniques Rico-Romano, Cristina Zubizarreta-Macho, Álvaro Baquero-Artigao, María-Rosario Mena-Álvarez, Jesús J Clin Exp Dent Research BACKGROUND: The goals of this randomized double-blind trial were to assess the antimicrobial activity in vivo of Sodium hypochlorite (NaOCl) vs. chlorhexidine gluconate (CHX) used in combination either with EndoActivator® or IRRI S® files in patients with apical periodontitis. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A total of 120 patients with apical periodontitis (in single or multiple root canals) were randomly assigned to the four irrigation protocols outlined below: Group A: 5.25% sodium hypochlorite (NaOCl) + EndoActivator®; Group B: 5.25% NaOCl + IRRI S® files; Group C: 2% chlorhexidine gluconate (CHX) + EndoActivator®; Group D: 2% CHX + IRRI S® files. Paper points were used to collect microbiological samples before (1A samples) and after (1B samples) irrigation. Viable colony-forming units (CFU) were quantified twice: (1) without speciation, and (2) only for Enterococcus Faecalis(EF). Statistical analysis was performed using SPSS 22.0 for Windows. RESULTS: No significant differences were observed between NaOCl and CHX in the reduction of CFU; in fact, reduction was < 93% for the two irrigants. Conversely, statistically significant differences were found between the two activation techniques (sonic and ultrasonic) in the reduction of Enterococcus Faecalis(EF). Thus, the effectiveness of ultrasonic activation was significantly higher (< 93%; p=0.012) as compared to sonic activation. Following the combination of the two irrigants with the two activation techniques (groups A, B, C and D), significant differences were observed between group A and B (p=0.025) in the reduction of EF populations, reaching up to 94%. CONCLUSIONS: NaClO and CHX are effective in reducing intracanal bacterial load. Ultrasonic activation is the most effective activation technique in reducing EF populations. Key words:Chlorhexidine gluconate, sodium hypochlorite, ultrasonic irrigation, sonic irrigation, apical periodontitis, Enterococcus faecalis. Medicina Oral S.L. 2016-02-01 /pmc/articles/PMC4739376/ /pubmed/26855714 http://dx.doi.org/10.4317/jced.52585 Text en Copyright: © 2016 Medicina Oral S.L. http://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
Rico-Romano, Cristina
Zubizarreta-Macho, Álvaro
Baquero-Artigao, María-Rosario
Mena-Álvarez, Jesús
An analysis in vivo of intracanal bacterial load before and after chemo-mechanical preparation: A comparative analysis of two irrigants and two activation techniques
title An analysis in vivo of intracanal bacterial load before and after chemo-mechanical preparation: A comparative analysis of two irrigants and two activation techniques
title_full An analysis in vivo of intracanal bacterial load before and after chemo-mechanical preparation: A comparative analysis of two irrigants and two activation techniques
title_fullStr An analysis in vivo of intracanal bacterial load before and after chemo-mechanical preparation: A comparative analysis of two irrigants and two activation techniques
title_full_unstemmed An analysis in vivo of intracanal bacterial load before and after chemo-mechanical preparation: A comparative analysis of two irrigants and two activation techniques
title_short An analysis in vivo of intracanal bacterial load before and after chemo-mechanical preparation: A comparative analysis of two irrigants and two activation techniques
title_sort analysis in vivo of intracanal bacterial load before and after chemo-mechanical preparation: a comparative analysis of two irrigants and two activation techniques
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4739376/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26855714
http://dx.doi.org/10.4317/jced.52585
work_keys_str_mv AT ricoromanocristina ananalysisinvivoofintracanalbacterialloadbeforeandafterchemomechanicalpreparationacomparativeanalysisoftwoirrigantsandtwoactivationtechniques
AT zubizarretamachoalvaro ananalysisinvivoofintracanalbacterialloadbeforeandafterchemomechanicalpreparationacomparativeanalysisoftwoirrigantsandtwoactivationtechniques
AT baqueroartigaomariarosario ananalysisinvivoofintracanalbacterialloadbeforeandafterchemomechanicalpreparationacomparativeanalysisoftwoirrigantsandtwoactivationtechniques
AT menaalvarezjesus ananalysisinvivoofintracanalbacterialloadbeforeandafterchemomechanicalpreparationacomparativeanalysisoftwoirrigantsandtwoactivationtechniques
AT ricoromanocristina analysisinvivoofintracanalbacterialloadbeforeandafterchemomechanicalpreparationacomparativeanalysisoftwoirrigantsandtwoactivationtechniques
AT zubizarretamachoalvaro analysisinvivoofintracanalbacterialloadbeforeandafterchemomechanicalpreparationacomparativeanalysisoftwoirrigantsandtwoactivationtechniques
AT baqueroartigaomariarosario analysisinvivoofintracanalbacterialloadbeforeandafterchemomechanicalpreparationacomparativeanalysisoftwoirrigantsandtwoactivationtechniques
AT menaalvarezjesus analysisinvivoofintracanalbacterialloadbeforeandafterchemomechanicalpreparationacomparativeanalysisoftwoirrigantsandtwoactivationtechniques