Sohail Yasin, D N Nirupama, Mohan Thomas Nainan, D N Naveen, R Vijay, Helen Thomas
{"title":"三种不同根管冲洗剂根管消毒效果的比较：体外生物发光辅助研究。","authors":"Sohail Yasin, D N Nirupama, Mohan Thomas Nainan, D N Naveen, R Vijay, Helen Thomas","doi":"10.4103/JCDE.JCDE_594_24","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Aim: </strong>To compare and evaluate root canal disinfection efficacy of three different endodontic irrigants 2.5% sodium hypochlorite (NaOCl), 2% chlorhexidine (CHX), and 2% alexidine (ALX) using negative pressure irrigation (NPI) system with EndoVac and syringe irrigation (SI) against <i>Enterococcus faecalis</i>.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Seventy single-rooted mandibular premolars were decoronated, enlarged up to F4, autoclaved, and inoculated with <i>E. faecalis</i> for 21 days. The samples were divided into seven groups (n = 10) according to the protocol of disinfection: G1: 2.5% NaOCl + NPI, G2: 2.5% NaOCl + SI, G3: 2% CHX + NPI, G4: 2% CHX + SI, G5: 2% ALX + NPI, G6: 2% ALX + SI, and G7: no irrigation (positive control group). Adenosine triphosphate Assay was performed using luminometer for relative luminescence units (RLU) before and after the irrigation protocol.</p><p><strong>Statistical analysis: </strong>One-way ANOVA test followed by Dunn's <i>post hoc</i> and Wilcoxon Signed-Rank Test analysis was performed (<i>P</i> < 0.05).</p><p><strong>Results and conclusion: </strong>G1 (7.90 ± 6.03) and G2 (2.90 ± 1.79) exhibited the least mean RLU values with no significant difference among them. It was noted that G5 (32.30 ± 7.92) performed better than G6 (14.20 ± 4.05) significantly (<i>P</i> < 0.008). G3 (27.70 ± 7.85) and G4 (28.50 ± 6.62) irrespective of irrigation protocols did not show significant differences in disinfection efficacy. Irrespective of irrigation protocol used, all the 3 irrigants exhibited a decrease in RLU values. In our study, EndoVac irrigation system did not improve the disinfection efficacy of the irrgiants.</p>","PeriodicalId":516842,"journal":{"name":"Journal of conservative dentistry and endodontics","volume":"28 2","pages":"132-137"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11878680/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparative evaluation of root canal disinfection efficacy of three different endodontic irrigants using EndoVac: An <i>in vitro</i> bioluminescence-assisted study.\",\"authors\":\"Sohail Yasin, D N Nirupama, Mohan Thomas Nainan, D N Naveen, R Vijay, Helen Thomas\",\"doi\":\"10.4103/JCDE.JCDE_594_24\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Aim: </strong>To compare and evaluate root canal disinfection efficacy of three different endodontic irrigants 2.5% sodium hypochlorite (NaOCl), 2% chlorhexidine (CHX), and 2% alexidine (ALX) using negative pressure irrigation (NPI) system with EndoVac and syringe irrigation (SI) against <i>Enterococcus faecalis</i>.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Seventy single-rooted mandibular premolars were decoronated, enlarged up to F4, autoclaved, and inoculated with <i>E. faecalis</i> for 21 days. The samples were divided into seven groups (n = 10) according to the protocol of disinfection: G1: 2.5% NaOCl + NPI, G2: 2.5% NaOCl + SI, G3: 2% CHX + NPI, G4: 2% CHX + SI, G5: 2% ALX + NPI, G6: 2% ALX + SI, and G7: no irrigation (positive control group). Adenosine triphosphate Assay was performed using luminometer for relative luminescence units (RLU) before and after the irrigation protocol.</p><p><strong>Statistical analysis: </strong>One-way ANOVA test followed by Dunn's <i>post hoc</i> and Wilcoxon Signed-Rank Test analysis was performed (<i>P</i> < 0.05).</p><p><strong>Results and conclusion: </strong>G1 (7.90 ± 6.03) and G2 (2.90 ± 1.79) exhibited the least mean RLU values with no significant difference among them. It was noted that G5 (32.30 ± 7.92) performed better than G6 (14.20 ± 4.05) significantly (<i>P</i> < 0.008). G3 (27.70 ± 7.85) and G4 (28.50 ± 6.62) irrespective of irrigation protocols did not show significant differences in disinfection efficacy. Irrespective of irrigation protocol used, all the 3 irrigants exhibited a decrease in RLU values. In our study, EndoVac irrigation system did not improve the disinfection efficacy of the irrgiants.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":516842,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of conservative dentistry and endodontics\",\"volume\":\"28 2\",\"pages\":\"132-137\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-02-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11878680/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_594_24\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/2/3 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of conservative dentistry and endodontics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/JCDE.JCDE_594_24","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/2/3 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
Comparative evaluation of root canal disinfection efficacy of three different endodontic irrigants using EndoVac: An in vitro bioluminescence-assisted study.
Aim: To compare and evaluate root canal disinfection efficacy of three different endodontic irrigants 2.5% sodium hypochlorite (NaOCl), 2% chlorhexidine (CHX), and 2% alexidine (ALX) using negative pressure irrigation (NPI) system with EndoVac and syringe irrigation (SI) against Enterococcus faecalis.
Materials and methods: Seventy single-rooted mandibular premolars were decoronated, enlarged up to F4, autoclaved, and inoculated with E. faecalis for 21 days. The samples were divided into seven groups (n = 10) according to the protocol of disinfection: G1: 2.5% NaOCl + NPI, G2: 2.5% NaOCl + SI, G3: 2% CHX + NPI, G4: 2% CHX + SI, G5: 2% ALX + NPI, G6: 2% ALX + SI, and G7: no irrigation (positive control group). Adenosine triphosphate Assay was performed using luminometer for relative luminescence units (RLU) before and after the irrigation protocol.
Statistical analysis: One-way ANOVA test followed by Dunn's post hoc and Wilcoxon Signed-Rank Test analysis was performed (P < 0.05).
Results and conclusion: G1 (7.90 ± 6.03) and G2 (2.90 ± 1.79) exhibited the least mean RLU values with no significant difference among them. It was noted that G5 (32.30 ± 7.92) performed better than G6 (14.20 ± 4.05) significantly (P < 0.008). G3 (27.70 ± 7.85) and G4 (28.50 ± 6.62) irrespective of irrigation protocols did not show significant differences in disinfection efficacy. Irrespective of irrigation protocol used, all the 3 irrigants exhibited a decrease in RLU values. In our study, EndoVac irrigation system did not improve the disinfection efficacy of the irrgiants.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
