Cargando…

Comparison of GentleWave system and passive ultrasonic irrigation with minimally invasive and conventional instrumentation against LPS in infected root canals

This study compared the effectiveness of GentleWave system (GWS) and passive ultrasonic irrigation (PUI) in removing lipopolysaccharides (LPS) from infected root canals after minimally invasive (MIT) and conventional instrumentation (CIT) techniques. Sixty first premolars with two roots were inocula...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Velardi, Johnathan P., Alquria, Theeb A., Alfirdous, Rayyan A., Corazza, Bruna J. M., Gomes, Ana P. M., Silva, Eduardo G., Griffin, Ina L., Tordik, Patricia A., Martinho, Frederico C.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Nature Publishing Group UK 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8940914/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35318365
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-08835-4
_version_ 1784672999517978624
author Velardi, Johnathan P.
Alquria, Theeb A.
Alfirdous, Rayyan A.
Corazza, Bruna J. M.
Gomes, Ana P. M.
Silva, Eduardo G.
Griffin, Ina L.
Tordik, Patricia A.
Martinho, Frederico C.
author_facet Velardi, Johnathan P.
Alquria, Theeb A.
Alfirdous, Rayyan A.
Corazza, Bruna J. M.
Gomes, Ana P. M.
Silva, Eduardo G.
Griffin, Ina L.
Tordik, Patricia A.
Martinho, Frederico C.
author_sort Velardi, Johnathan P.
collection PubMed
description This study compared the effectiveness of GentleWave system (GWS) and passive ultrasonic irrigation (PUI) in removing lipopolysaccharides (LPS) from infected root canals after minimally invasive (MIT) and conventional instrumentation (CIT) techniques. Sixty first premolars with two roots were inoculated with fluorescent LPS conjugate (Alexa Fluor 594). Of those, twelve were dentin pretreated, inoculated with fluorescent LPS conjugate, and submitted to confocal laser scanning microscopy (CLSM) to validate the LPS-infection model. Forty-eight teeth were randomly divided into treatment groups: GWS + MIT, GWS + CIT, PUI + MIT, and PUI + CIT (all, n = 12). Teeth were instrumented with Vortex Blue rotary file size 15/0.04 for MIT and 35/0.04 for CIT. Samples were collected before (s1) and after a root canal procedure (s2) and after cryogenically ground the teeth (s3) for intraradicular LPS analysis. LPS were quantified with LAL assay (KQCL test). GWS + MIT and GWS + CIT were the most effective protocols against LPS, with no difference between them (p > 0.05). PUI + CIT was more effective than PUI + MIT (p < 0.05) but less effective than GWS + MIT and GWS + CIT. GWS was the most effective protocol against LPS in infected root canals using MIT and CIT techniques.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8940914
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher Nature Publishing Group UK
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-89409142022-03-28 Comparison of GentleWave system and passive ultrasonic irrigation with minimally invasive and conventional instrumentation against LPS in infected root canals Velardi, Johnathan P. Alquria, Theeb A. Alfirdous, Rayyan A. Corazza, Bruna J. M. Gomes, Ana P. M. Silva, Eduardo G. Griffin, Ina L. Tordik, Patricia A. Martinho, Frederico C. Sci Rep Article This study compared the effectiveness of GentleWave system (GWS) and passive ultrasonic irrigation (PUI) in removing lipopolysaccharides (LPS) from infected root canals after minimally invasive (MIT) and conventional instrumentation (CIT) techniques. Sixty first premolars with two roots were inoculated with fluorescent LPS conjugate (Alexa Fluor 594). Of those, twelve were dentin pretreated, inoculated with fluorescent LPS conjugate, and submitted to confocal laser scanning microscopy (CLSM) to validate the LPS-infection model. Forty-eight teeth were randomly divided into treatment groups: GWS + MIT, GWS + CIT, PUI + MIT, and PUI + CIT (all, n = 12). Teeth were instrumented with Vortex Blue rotary file size 15/0.04 for MIT and 35/0.04 for CIT. Samples were collected before (s1) and after a root canal procedure (s2) and after cryogenically ground the teeth (s3) for intraradicular LPS analysis. LPS were quantified with LAL assay (KQCL test). GWS + MIT and GWS + CIT were the most effective protocols against LPS, with no difference between them (p > 0.05). PUI + CIT was more effective than PUI + MIT (p < 0.05) but less effective than GWS + MIT and GWS + CIT. GWS was the most effective protocol against LPS in infected root canals using MIT and CIT techniques. Nature Publishing Group UK 2022-03-22 /pmc/articles/PMC8940914/ /pubmed/35318365 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-08835-4 Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) .
spellingShingle Article
Velardi, Johnathan P.
Alquria, Theeb A.
Alfirdous, Rayyan A.
Corazza, Bruna J. M.
Gomes, Ana P. M.
Silva, Eduardo G.
Griffin, Ina L.
Tordik, Patricia A.
Martinho, Frederico C.
Comparison of GentleWave system and passive ultrasonic irrigation with minimally invasive and conventional instrumentation against LPS in infected root canals
title Comparison of GentleWave system and passive ultrasonic irrigation with minimally invasive and conventional instrumentation against LPS in infected root canals
title_full Comparison of GentleWave system and passive ultrasonic irrigation with minimally invasive and conventional instrumentation against LPS in infected root canals
title_fullStr Comparison of GentleWave system and passive ultrasonic irrigation with minimally invasive and conventional instrumentation against LPS in infected root canals
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of GentleWave system and passive ultrasonic irrigation with minimally invasive and conventional instrumentation against LPS in infected root canals
title_short Comparison of GentleWave system and passive ultrasonic irrigation with minimally invasive and conventional instrumentation against LPS in infected root canals
title_sort comparison of gentlewave system and passive ultrasonic irrigation with minimally invasive and conventional instrumentation against lps in infected root canals
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8940914/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35318365
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-08835-4
work_keys_str_mv AT velardijohnathanp comparisonofgentlewavesystemandpassiveultrasonicirrigationwithminimallyinvasiveandconventionalinstrumentationagainstlpsininfectedrootcanals
AT alquriatheeba comparisonofgentlewavesystemandpassiveultrasonicirrigationwithminimallyinvasiveandconventionalinstrumentationagainstlpsininfectedrootcanals
AT alfirdousrayyana comparisonofgentlewavesystemandpassiveultrasonicirrigationwithminimallyinvasiveandconventionalinstrumentationagainstlpsininfectedrootcanals
AT corazzabrunajm comparisonofgentlewavesystemandpassiveultrasonicirrigationwithminimallyinvasiveandconventionalinstrumentationagainstlpsininfectedrootcanals
AT gomesanapm comparisonofgentlewavesystemandpassiveultrasonicirrigationwithminimallyinvasiveandconventionalinstrumentationagainstlpsininfectedrootcanals
AT silvaeduardog comparisonofgentlewavesystemandpassiveultrasonicirrigationwithminimallyinvasiveandconventionalinstrumentationagainstlpsininfectedrootcanals
AT griffininal comparisonofgentlewavesystemandpassiveultrasonicirrigationwithminimallyinvasiveandconventionalinstrumentationagainstlpsininfectedrootcanals
AT tordikpatriciaa comparisonofgentlewavesystemandpassiveultrasonicirrigationwithminimallyinvasiveandconventionalinstrumentationagainstlpsininfectedrootcanals
AT martinhofredericoc comparisonofgentlewavesystemandpassiveultrasonicirrigationwithminimallyinvasiveandconventionalinstrumentationagainstlpsininfectedrootcanals