Comparison of Antibacterial Activities of ProRoot MTA, OrthoMTA, and RetroMTA Against Three Anaerobic Endodontic Bacteria.

Sedigheh Khedmat, Mohammad Aminipor, Maryam Pourhajibagher, Mohammad Javad Kharazifar, Abbas Bahador
{"title":"Comparison of Antibacterial Activities of ProRoot MTA, OrthoMTA, and RetroMTA Against Three Anaerobic Endodontic Bacteria.","authors":"Sedigheh Khedmat,&nbsp;Mohammad Aminipor,&nbsp;Maryam Pourhajibagher,&nbsp;Mohammad Javad Kharazifar,&nbsp;Abbas Bahador","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>The aim of this study was to assess the antibacterial activities of OrthoMTA, RetroMTA, and ProRoot MTA against <i>Fusobacterium nucleatum</i> (<i>Fn</i>), <i>Porphyromonas gingivalis</i> (<i>Pg</i>), and <i>Prevotella intermedia</i> (<i>Pi</i>)<i>.</i></p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Each material was mixed on a glass slab using a spatula and was placed in columns containing the filter membrane of the modified membrane-enclosed immersion test (MEIT) system. The materials were sterilized after setting. The columns containing the sterilized test materials were placed in microcentrifuge tubes containing 500 μl of bacterial suspension. The systems were then incubated at 37°C under anaerobic conditions. After 72 hours, the bacterial growth and concentration (colony-forming unit (CFU)/ml) were assessed. The results were analyzed using one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Tukey's post-hoc test in SPSS 22 software. In all analyses, the differences were considered significant at P<0.05.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>OrthoMTA had the highest antibacterial activity against <i>Pi</i>. The mean number of CFU/ml of <i>Fn</i> in the presence of ProRoot MTA and RetroMTA was significantly lower than that in positive controls. There were significant differences between the antibacterial activities of ProRoot MTA and OrthoMTA against <i>Pg</i> compared to positive controls<i>.</i></p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>ProRoot MTA, OrthoMTA, and RetroMTA had similar antibacterial activities against the three evaluated anaerobic endodontic bacteria, except RetroMTA against <i>Pg</i>.</p>","PeriodicalId":30286,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Dentistry of Tehran University of Medical Sciences","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6397732/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Dentistry of Tehran University of Medical Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: The aim of this study was to assess the antibacterial activities of OrthoMTA, RetroMTA, and ProRoot MTA against Fusobacterium nucleatum (Fn), Porphyromonas gingivalis (Pg), and Prevotella intermedia (Pi).

Materials and methods: Each material was mixed on a glass slab using a spatula and was placed in columns containing the filter membrane of the modified membrane-enclosed immersion test (MEIT) system. The materials were sterilized after setting. The columns containing the sterilized test materials were placed in microcentrifuge tubes containing 500 μl of bacterial suspension. The systems were then incubated at 37°C under anaerobic conditions. After 72 hours, the bacterial growth and concentration (colony-forming unit (CFU)/ml) were assessed. The results were analyzed using one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Tukey's post-hoc test in SPSS 22 software. In all analyses, the differences were considered significant at P<0.05.

Results: OrthoMTA had the highest antibacterial activity against Pi. The mean number of CFU/ml of Fn in the presence of ProRoot MTA and RetroMTA was significantly lower than that in positive controls. There were significant differences between the antibacterial activities of ProRoot MTA and OrthoMTA against Pg compared to positive controls.

Conclusions: ProRoot MTA, OrthoMTA, and RetroMTA had similar antibacterial activities against the three evaluated anaerobic endodontic bacteria, except RetroMTA against Pg.

proorroot MTA、OrthoMTA和RetroMTA对三种厌氧根管细菌的抑菌活性比较
目的:研究OrthoMTA、RetroMTA和prooroot MTA对核梭杆菌(Fn)、牙龈卟啉单胞菌(Pg)和中间普雷沃菌(Pi)的抑菌活性。材料和方法:每种材料用抹刀在玻璃板上混合,并放置在含有改良膜封闭浸泡试验(MEIT)系统过滤膜的柱中。材料凝固后进行灭菌。将灭菌后的实验材料柱置于含有500 μl菌悬液的微离心管中。然后在37°C厌氧条件下培养系统。72h后,评估细菌生长和浓度(菌落形成单位(CFU)/ml)。采用SPSS 22软件进行单因素方差分析(ANOVA)和Tukey’s事后检验。结果表明:OrthoMTA对Pi的抑菌活性最高。prooroot MTA和RetroMTA存在时,Fn的平均CFU/ml数显著低于阳性对照。与阳性对照相比,prooroot MTA和OrthoMTA对Pg的抑菌活性有显著差异。结论:prooroot MTA、OrthoMTA和RetroMTA对三种厌氧根管细菌的抑菌活性相似,但RetroMTA对Pg的抑菌活性不同。
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
审稿时长
24 weeks
×
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