Comparison of the Enterococcus faecalis Colony Reduction Effect of Two Wavelengths of Diode Lasers With Three Methods of Root Canal Irrigation: An In Vitro Study.

IF 1.4 Q3 RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING
Journal of lasers in medical sciences Pub Date : 2024-08-07 eCollection Date: 2024-01-01 DOI:10.34172/jlms.2024.37
Shiva Shirani Lapari, Maryam Zare Jahromi, Arezoo Tahmourespour, Amir Mansour Shirani
{"title":"Comparison of the <i>Enterococcus faecalis</i> Colony Reduction Effect of Two Wavelengths of Diode Lasers With Three Methods of Root Canal Irrigation: An In Vitro Study.","authors":"Shiva Shirani Lapari, Maryam Zare Jahromi, Arezoo Tahmourespour, Amir Mansour Shirani","doi":"10.34172/jlms.2024.37","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Introduction:</b> The basis of successful root canal therapy is the reduction of microorganisms. The aim of this in vitro study was to compare the antibacterial effect of three different irrigation methods with two laser wavelengths on <i>Enterococcus faecalis</i> biofilm. <b>Methods:</b> Ninety-five single-canal teeth were prepared, sterilized, and divided randomly into a negative control, a positive control, and five test groups. They were inoculated with the standard strain of <i>E. faecalis</i>. The test groups were conventional irrigation (group 1), Passive ultrasonic irrigation (group 2), Gentle file finisher brush (group 3), 810 nm diode laser (group 4), and 980 nm diode laser (group 5). Microbial sampling, cultivation, and colony counting were done. Data were analyzed with the Kruskal-Wallis test and a negative binomial regression model. <b>Results:</b> There was a significant difference in the colony count between the groups (<i>P</i><0.001). the 810 nm diode had the highest and the conventional irrigation group had the lowest reduction in the microbial load. Passive ultrasonic, 980 nm diode laser, and Gentle file finisher brush groups were also ranked respectively from the highest to the lowest in terms of decreasing effect on the number of colonies. <b>Conclusion:</b> The 810 nm diode laser and conventional irrigation were respectively the most and the least effective methods for reducing the number of <i>E. faecalis</i> colonies.</p>","PeriodicalId":16224,"journal":{"name":"Journal of lasers in medical sciences","volume":"15 ","pages":"e37"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11348442/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of lasers in medical sciences","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.34172/jlms.2024.37","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: The basis of successful root canal therapy is the reduction of microorganisms. The aim of this in vitro study was to compare the antibacterial effect of three different irrigation methods with two laser wavelengths on Enterococcus faecalis biofilm. Methods: Ninety-five single-canal teeth were prepared, sterilized, and divided randomly into a negative control, a positive control, and five test groups. They were inoculated with the standard strain of E. faecalis. The test groups were conventional irrigation (group 1), Passive ultrasonic irrigation (group 2), Gentle file finisher brush (group 3), 810 nm diode laser (group 4), and 980 nm diode laser (group 5). Microbial sampling, cultivation, and colony counting were done. Data were analyzed with the Kruskal-Wallis test and a negative binomial regression model. Results: There was a significant difference in the colony count between the groups (P<0.001). the 810 nm diode had the highest and the conventional irrigation group had the lowest reduction in the microbial load. Passive ultrasonic, 980 nm diode laser, and Gentle file finisher brush groups were also ranked respectively from the highest to the lowest in terms of decreasing effect on the number of colonies. Conclusion: The 810 nm diode laser and conventional irrigation were respectively the most and the least effective methods for reducing the number of E. faecalis colonies.

两种波长的二极管激光与三种根管冲洗方法对粪肠球菌菌落减少效果的比较:体外研究
简介成功根管治疗的基础是减少微生物。本体外研究旨在比较三种不同灌洗方法和两种激光波长对粪肠球菌生物膜的抗菌效果。研究方法制备 95 颗单冠牙,消毒后随机分为阴性对照组、阳性对照组和五个试验组。将标准菌株接种到这些牙齿上。试验组分别为常规冲洗(第 1 组)、被动超声波冲洗(第 2 组)、温和锉磨刷(第 3 组)、810 纳米二极管激光(第 4 组)和 980 纳米二极管激光(第 5 组)。进行微生物取样、培养和菌落计数。数据分析采用 Kruskal-Wallis 检验和负二项回归模型。结果各组间的菌落计数有明显差异(PC结论:810 纳米二极管激光和传统灌溉分别是减少粪肠球菌菌落数量最有效和最无效的方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of lasers in medical sciences
Journal of lasers in medical sciences RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING-
CiteScore
3.00
自引率
13.30%
发文量
24
期刊介绍: The "Journal of Lasers in Medical Sciences " is a scientific quarterly publication of the Laser Application in Medical Sciences Research Center, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences. This journal received a scientific and research rank from the national medical publication committee. This Journal accepts original papers, review articles, case reports, brief reports, case series, photo assays, letters to the editor, and commentaries in the field of laser, or light in any fields of medicine such as the following medical specialties: -Dermatology -General and Vascular Surgery -Oncology -Cardiology -Dentistry -Urology -Rehabilitation -Ophthalmology -Otorhinolaryngology -Gynecology & Obstetrics -Internal Medicine -Orthopedics -Neurosurgery -Radiology -Pain Medicine (Algology) -Basic Sciences (Stem cell, Cellular and Molecular application and physic)
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信