Prevalence of Enterococcus faecalis in refractory endodontic infections: A microbiological study.

Jyoti Sharma, Swaty Jhamb, Manjula Mehta, Jagat Bhushan, Sonia Bhonchal Bhardwaj, Amandeep Kaur
{"title":"Prevalence of <i>Enterococcus faecalis</i> in refractory endodontic infections: A microbiological study.","authors":"Jyoti Sharma, Swaty Jhamb, Manjula Mehta, Jagat Bhushan, Sonia Bhonchal Bhardwaj, Amandeep Kaur","doi":"10.4103/JCDE.JCDE_871_24","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Root canal treatment (RCT) failure occurs due to persistent infections, missed canals, or anatomical complexities, with <i>Enterococcus faecalis</i> being the predominant microorganism associated with treatment failure. This study aimed to determine the prevalence of <i>E. faecalis</i> in failed root canal cases and its correlation with clinical parameters.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>A cross-sectional study was conducted on 50 patients aged 18-50 years requiring nonsurgical endodontic retreatment. Samples were collected using sterile paper points, gutta-percha, and oral swabs. Clinical data such as age, gender, tooth location, and radiographic findings were documented.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>All samples exhibited polymicrobial infections. <i>E. faecalis</i> was the most prevalent species predominantly isolated using paper points. Other organisms included <i>Streptococcus</i> spp., <i>Candida</i> spp., and <i>Escherichia coli</i>. Oral swabs showed lower detection rates for <i>E. faecalis</i> as compared to other samples for microbial isolation, Gram-positive bacteria (86%) dominated, followed by Gram-negative bacteria (8.3%) and yeast (5%). The findings confirm <i>E. faecalis</i> as the most prevalent microorganism in failed RCT cases. Its resilience, ability to form biofilms, and resistance to conventional treatment contribute to persistent infections. No significant correlation was observed between bacterial prevalence and demographic factors or tooth position. Differences in microbial detection rates among sampling methods emphasize the importance of multiple sampling approaches for accurate microbial recovery.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong><i>E. faecalis</i> is highly prevalent in refractory endodontic infections, underscoring its role in treatment failure. The use of sterile paper points and gutta-percha samples effectively detects intracanal microbes. Advanced molecular techniques may further improve the understanding of endodontic microbiota and help reduce failure rates.</p>","PeriodicalId":516842,"journal":{"name":"Journal of conservative dentistry and endodontics","volume":"28 5","pages":"462-467"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12129294/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of conservative dentistry and endodontics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/JCDE.JCDE_871_24","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/5/6 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Root canal treatment (RCT) failure occurs due to persistent infections, missed canals, or anatomical complexities, with Enterococcus faecalis being the predominant microorganism associated with treatment failure. This study aimed to determine the prevalence of E. faecalis in failed root canal cases and its correlation with clinical parameters.

Materials and methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted on 50 patients aged 18-50 years requiring nonsurgical endodontic retreatment. Samples were collected using sterile paper points, gutta-percha, and oral swabs. Clinical data such as age, gender, tooth location, and radiographic findings were documented.

Results: All samples exhibited polymicrobial infections. E. faecalis was the most prevalent species predominantly isolated using paper points. Other organisms included Streptococcus spp., Candida spp., and Escherichia coli. Oral swabs showed lower detection rates for E. faecalis as compared to other samples for microbial isolation, Gram-positive bacteria (86%) dominated, followed by Gram-negative bacteria (8.3%) and yeast (5%). The findings confirm E. faecalis as the most prevalent microorganism in failed RCT cases. Its resilience, ability to form biofilms, and resistance to conventional treatment contribute to persistent infections. No significant correlation was observed between bacterial prevalence and demographic factors or tooth position. Differences in microbial detection rates among sampling methods emphasize the importance of multiple sampling approaches for accurate microbial recovery.

Conclusion: E. faecalis is highly prevalent in refractory endodontic infections, underscoring its role in treatment failure. The use of sterile paper points and gutta-percha samples effectively detects intracanal microbes. Advanced molecular techniques may further improve the understanding of endodontic microbiota and help reduce failure rates.

难治性牙髓感染中粪肠球菌的流行:一项微生物学研究。
背景:根管治疗(RCT)失败的发生是由于持续感染、根管遗漏或解剖复杂性,粪肠球菌是与治疗失败相关的主要微生物。本研究旨在确定粪肠球菌在根管治疗失败病例中的患病率及其与临床参数的相关性。材料与方法:对50例年龄18-50岁需要非手术再治疗的患者进行横断面研究。使用无菌纸点、杜胶和口腔拭子采集样本。记录临床资料,如年龄、性别、牙齿位置和影像学表现。结果:所有样品均出现多微生物感染。粪伊蚊是最常见的种,主要采用纸点隔离。其他生物包括链球菌、念珠菌和大肠杆菌。口腔拭子对粪肠球菌的检出率较低,革兰氏阳性菌(86%)占多数,其次是革兰氏阴性菌(8.3%)和酵母(5%)。研究结果证实粪肠球菌是RCT失败病例中最普遍的微生物。它的弹性、形成生物膜的能力以及对常规治疗的抵抗力导致了持续感染。细菌患病率与人口统计学因素或牙齿位置无显著相关性。不同采样方法中微生物检出率的差异强调了多种采样方法对精确微生物回收的重要性。结论:粪肠球菌在难治性牙髓感染中非常普遍,在治疗失败中起重要作用。使用无菌纸点和杜仲胶样品可有效检测肛门内微生物。先进的分子技术可以进一步提高对牙髓微生物群的认识,并有助于降低失败率。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信