medigraphic.com
ISSN 1870-199X (Print)
Órgano oficial de la Facultad de Odontología, UNAM

2017, Number 4

<< Back Next >>

Rev Odont Mex 2017; 21 (4)

Comparison of OxOral® and NaOCl irrigants efficiency in Enterococcus faecalis elimination

Herrera SA, Corona GMA, Vara PFJ, Gutiérrez VDH, Alavez RSL

Language: Spanish
References: 24
Page: 241-244
PDF size: 204.58 Kb.


ABSTRACT

Objective: To compare effectiveness of OxOral® versus sodium hypochlorite in Enterococcus faecalis elimination at 15 and 60 seconds. Material and methods: Material used in the study was 36 E. faecalis ATCC 29212 cultures assigned to two groups: OxOral® and 5.25% sodium hypochlorite. Both groups were in turn divided into 15 and 60 second samples. Samples were placed in peptone water, 1 mL of irrigating solution and 1 mL of strain were left to rest. 1 mL was extracted at each time, samples were seeded into blood agar for 24 hours. Mann-Whitney U test was applied. Results: With sodium hypochlorite at 15 seconds, there were three cultures with acceptable growth and six with extended growth; at 60 seconds four cultures exhibited effective result, three acceptable and one extended. With OxOral® there was extended growth in all nine cultures at both established times, significant statistical differences were found at the 60 seconds time (p ‹ 0.01). Conclusion: E. faecalis elimination was better with sodium hypochlorite at 60 seconds.


REFERENCES

  1. Walton RE, Torabinejad M. Endodoncia principios y práctica. 2a edición. México: Editorial McGraw-Hill Interamericana; 1997. p. 1.

  2. Cohen S. Vías de la pulpa. 8a edición. España: Editorial Elsevier Science; 2004. p. 108.

  3. Thomas JE, Sem DS. An in vitro spectroscopic analysis to determine whether para-chloroaniline is produced from mixing sodium hypochlorite and chlorhexidine. J Endod. 2010; 36 (2): 315-317.

  4. Delgado RJ, Gasparoto TH, Sipert CR, Pinheiro CR, Moraes IG, Garcia RB et al. Antimicrobial effects of calcium hydroxide and chlorhexidine on Enterococcus faecalis. J Endod. 2010; 36 (8): 1389-1393.

  5. Arens DE. Practical lessons in endodontic treatment. China: Editorial Quintessence Publishing; 2009. pp. 145-146.

  6. Gutmann JL. Solución de problemas en endodoncia, prevención, identificación y tratamiento. 4a edición. España: Editorial Elsevier Science; 2007. pp. 3-114.

  7. Cobankara FK, Ozkan HB, Terlemez A. Comparison of organic tissue dissolution capacities of sodium hypochlorite and chlorine dioxide. J Endod. 2010; 36 (2): 272-274.

  8. Ballal NV, Moorkoth S, Mala K, Bhat KS, Hussen SS, Pathak S. Evaluation of chemical interactions of maleic acid with sodium hypochlorite and chlorhexidine gluconate. J Endod. 2011; 37 (10): 1402-1405.

  9. Kandaswamy D, Venkateshbabu N. Root canal irrigants. J Conserv Dent. 2010; 13 (4): 256-264.

  10. Canalda C, Brau E. Endodoncia técnicas clínicas y bases científicas. España: Editorial Masson; 2001. pp. 29-36.

  11. Al-Ahmad A, Müller N, Wiedmann-Al-Ahmad M, Sava I, Hübner J, Follo M et al. Endodontic and salivary isolates of Enterococcus faecalis integrate into biofilm from human salivary bacteria cultivated in vitro. J Endod. 2009; 35 (7): 986-991.

  12. Zhu X, Wang Q, Zhang C, Cheung GS, Shen Y. Prevalence, phenotype, and genotype of Enterococcus faecalis isolated from saliva and root canals in patients with persistent apical periodontitis. J Endod. 2010; 36 (12): 1950-1955.

  13. Madhubala MM, Srinivasan N, Ahamed S. Comparative evaluation of propolis and triantibiotic mixture as an intracanal medicament against Enterococcus faecalis. J Endod. 2011; 37 (9): 1287-1289.

  14. Lovato KF, Sedgley CM. Antibacterial activity of endosequence root repair material and proroot MTA against clinical isolates of Enterococcus faecalis. J Endod. 2011; 37 (11): 1542-1546.

  15. Cohen SK, Hargreaves KM. Vías de la pulpa. 9a edición. España: Editorial Elsevier Science; 2009. p. 347.

  16. Wang Z, Shen Y, Haapasalo M. Effect of smear layer against disinfection protocols on Enterococcus faecalis-infected dentin. J Endod. 2013; 39 (11): 1395-1400.

  17. Durán-Vega HC. Soluciones de superoxidación y su evolución tecnológica. Dol Foro Nal Invest Clín Méd. 2010; 7 (3): 4-8.

  18. Pérez-Romano L, González-Espinosa D, Nuñez-Ochoa L, Landa-Solís C, Gutiérrez AA. Solución de super-oxidación Microdacyn 60MR. Una tecnología de vanguardia para tratar heridas. Instituto Nacional de Rehabilitación, Secretaría de Salud de México, Facultad de Medicina y Veterinaria, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México; 2005.

  19. Rodríguez-Gorozpe CI, Jácome Musule JL, Perea-Mejía LM. Estudio comparativo de filtración microbiana coronal con tres diferentes materiales de restauración provisional en dientes obturados con Guttaflow. Rev Odont Mex. 2010; 14 (1): 21-31.

  20. Bergenholts G, Horsted-Bindslev P, Reit C. Text of endodontology. Reino Unido: Editorial Blackwell Munksgaard; 2003. p. 308.

  21. Rojas-Briones ME, Silva-Herzog Flores D, González-Amaro AM, Oliva-Rodríguez R. Evaluación comparativa de la capacidad antimicrobiana de una solución electrolizada de superoxidación con pH neutro y una solución a base de peróxido de hidrógeno. Rev ADM. 2013; 70 (4): 183-189.

  22. Harrison JW, Wagner GW, Henry CA. Comparison of the antimicrobial effectiveness of regular and fresh scent Clorox. J Endod. 1990; 16 (7): 328-330.

  23. Monteiro-Souza M, Gugelmin MCM, Saquy PC, Pécora JD. Ação antimicrobiana do hipoclorito de sódio em diferentes concentrações e tempos de contato. Odonto. 1992; 2 (4): 302-306.

  24. Zaragoza-Meneses MTJ, López-Badillo LE, Rodríguez-Martínez D. Comparación del efecto antimicrobiano de dos soluciones esterilizantes de superoxidación con pH neutro. Odont Act. 2012; 9 (110): 38-40.




2020     |     www.medigraphic.com