三种不同灌洗剂活化方法在消除根管中粪肠球菌方面的效果。

IF 1.8 Q2 SURGERY
Ozgur Genc Sen, Ali Erdemir
{"title":"三种不同灌洗剂活化方法在消除根管中粪肠球菌方面的效果。","authors":"Ozgur Genc Sen, Ali Erdemir","doi":"10.1089/pho.2023.0189","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b><i>Background and Objective:</i></b> Eliminating intracanal <i>Enterococcus faecalis</i> (<i>E. faecalis</i>) is challenging because of its ability to penetrate deep dentinal tubules and its high resistance to many chemicals. This study evaluated the effectiveness of conventional needle irrigation and three different irrigant activation methods in reducing <i>E. faecalis</i>. <b><i>Methods:</i></b> The root canals of extracted teeth were shaped, contaminated with <i>E. faecalis</i>, and incubated for three weeks. They were randomly allocated to four experimental groups of 15 teeth each according to the final irrigation method: group 1, conventional needle irrigation; group 2, passive ultrasonic (PU) irrigation; group 3, XP-endo Finisher (XPF); and group 4, laser-activated (LA) irrigation. Bacterial samples were taken and cultured before and after these final irrigation procedures. The colony-forming units were counted, and the bacterial reduction percentages of each group were calculated. The Kruskal-Wallis and Dunnet tests were used for statistical analysis. <b><i>Results:</i></b> All irrigant activation methods were significantly more effective than conventional needle irrigation. Although the LA group generated more negative samples than PU, there was no statistically significant difference between the LA and PU groups. LA was significantly more effective than the XPF, whereas PU and XPF were statistically similar. <b><i>Conclusions:</i></b> Within the limitations of this study, the final irrigation with LA and PU showed the best reductive effect on <i>E. faecalis</i> colonies. Considering that the LA group had more negative samples, it may be chosen as an alternative to enhance root canal disinfection, especially in difficult cases.</p>","PeriodicalId":94169,"journal":{"name":"Photobiomodulation, photomedicine, and laser surgery","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Effectiveness of Three Different Irrigant Activation Methods in the Elimination of <i>Enterococcus faecalis</i> from Root Canals.\",\"authors\":\"Ozgur Genc Sen, Ali Erdemir\",\"doi\":\"10.1089/pho.2023.0189\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p><b><i>Background and Objective:</i></b> Eliminating intracanal <i>Enterococcus faecalis</i> (<i>E. faecalis</i>) is challenging because of its ability to penetrate deep dentinal tubules and its high resistance to many chemicals. This study evaluated the effectiveness of conventional needle irrigation and three different irrigant activation methods in reducing <i>E. faecalis</i>. <b><i>Methods:</i></b> The root canals of extracted teeth were shaped, contaminated with <i>E. faecalis</i>, and incubated for three weeks. They were randomly allocated to four experimental groups of 15 teeth each according to the final irrigation method: group 1, conventional needle irrigation; group 2, passive ultrasonic (PU) irrigation; group 3, XP-endo Finisher (XPF); and group 4, laser-activated (LA) irrigation. Bacterial samples were taken and cultured before and after these final irrigation procedures. The colony-forming units were counted, and the bacterial reduction percentages of each group were calculated. The Kruskal-Wallis and Dunnet tests were used for statistical analysis. <b><i>Results:</i></b> All irrigant activation methods were significantly more effective than conventional needle irrigation. Although the LA group generated more negative samples than PU, there was no statistically significant difference between the LA and PU groups. LA was significantly more effective than the XPF, whereas PU and XPF were statistically similar. <b><i>Conclusions:</i></b> Within the limitations of this study, the final irrigation with LA and PU showed the best reductive effect on <i>E. faecalis</i> colonies. Considering that the LA group had more negative samples, it may be chosen as an alternative to enhance root canal disinfection, especially in difficult cases.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":94169,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Photobiomodulation, photomedicine, and laser surgery\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Photobiomodulation, photomedicine, and laser surgery\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1089/pho.2023.0189\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/7/15 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"SURGERY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Photobiomodulation, photomedicine, and laser surgery","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1089/pho.2023.0189","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/7/15 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景和目的:消灭牙槽骨内的粪肠球菌(E. faecalis)具有挑战性,因为它能够穿透深层牙本质小管,而且对许多化学物质具有很强的抵抗力。本研究评估了传统针头冲洗和三种不同冲洗剂激活方法在减少粪肠球菌方面的效果。方法:对拔牙的根管进行塑形,用粪大肠杆菌污染根管并培养三周。根据最终灌洗方法,将它们随机分配到四个实验组,每组 15 颗牙齿:第 1 组,传统针头灌洗;第 2 组,被动超声波(PU)灌洗;第 3 组,XP-endo Finisher(XPF);第 4 组,激光激活(LA)灌洗。在这些最终灌洗程序之前和之后采集细菌样本并进行培养。对菌落形成单位进行计数,并计算各组的细菌减少率。统计分析采用 Kruskal-Wallis 和 Dunnet 检验。结果所有灌流剂激活方法的效果都明显优于传统针头灌流法。虽然 LA 组比 PU 组产生更多的阴性样本,但 LA 组和 PU 组之间没有统计学意义上的显著差异。LA 明显比 XPF 更有效,而 PU 和 XPF 在统计学上相似。结论:在本研究的局限性范围内,LA 和 PU 的最终灌溉对粪大肠杆菌菌落的还原效果最好。考虑到 LA 组有更多的阴性样本,可以选择它作为加强根管消毒的替代方法,尤其是在疑难病例中。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The Effectiveness of Three Different Irrigant Activation Methods in the Elimination of Enterococcus faecalis from Root Canals.

Background and Objective: Eliminating intracanal Enterococcus faecalis (E. faecalis) is challenging because of its ability to penetrate deep dentinal tubules and its high resistance to many chemicals. This study evaluated the effectiveness of conventional needle irrigation and three different irrigant activation methods in reducing E. faecalis. Methods: The root canals of extracted teeth were shaped, contaminated with E. faecalis, and incubated for three weeks. They were randomly allocated to four experimental groups of 15 teeth each according to the final irrigation method: group 1, conventional needle irrigation; group 2, passive ultrasonic (PU) irrigation; group 3, XP-endo Finisher (XPF); and group 4, laser-activated (LA) irrigation. Bacterial samples were taken and cultured before and after these final irrigation procedures. The colony-forming units were counted, and the bacterial reduction percentages of each group were calculated. The Kruskal-Wallis and Dunnet tests were used for statistical analysis. Results: All irrigant activation methods were significantly more effective than conventional needle irrigation. Although the LA group generated more negative samples than PU, there was no statistically significant difference between the LA and PU groups. LA was significantly more effective than the XPF, whereas PU and XPF were statistically similar. Conclusions: Within the limitations of this study, the final irrigation with LA and PU showed the best reductive effect on E. faecalis colonies. Considering that the LA group had more negative samples, it may be chosen as an alternative to enhance root canal disinfection, especially in difficult cases.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: Photobiomodulation, Photomedicine, and Laser Surgery Editor-in-Chief: Michael R Hamblin, PhD Co-Editor-in-Chief: Heidi Abrahamse, PhD
×
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