次氯酸钠与氯己定根管冲洗抗菌效果比较分析。

IF 0.7 Q4 PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY
Journal of pharmacy & bioallied sciences Pub Date : 2025-05-01 Epub Date: 2025-02-25 DOI:10.4103/jpbs.jpbs_1422_24
L Karthik Prasad, Sheenam Markan, Mahishi G Suthar, Sweta Samal, Almazyad Yaser, Elaprolu Mallikarjun, Panthi Patel
{"title":"次氯酸钠与氯己定根管冲洗抗菌效果比较分析。","authors":"L Karthik Prasad, Sheenam Markan, Mahishi G Suthar, Sweta Samal, Almazyad Yaser, Elaprolu Mallikarjun, Panthi Patel","doi":"10.4103/jpbs.jpbs_1422_24","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>This research aims to analyze the antimicrobial efficacy of \"sodium hypochlorite (NaOCl)\" and \"chlorhexidine (CHX)\" as canal irrigants, evaluating their effects on bacterial load during \"Root canal treatment (RCT)\".</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>In this randomized controlled trial, 80 subjects requiring RCT were included. The participants were randomly allocated into two groups: Group A received 2.5% NaOCl as the irrigant, while Group B received 2% CHX. Microbial samples were gathered from the root canals using sterile paper points both before and after irrigation. The bacterial load was evaluated by counting \"colony-forming units (CFUs)\" following bacterial culture. Statistical analyzes were conducted using paired <i>t</i>-tests and ANOVA, with a significance level of <i>P</i> < 0.05.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Both NaOCl and CHX demonstrated substantial reductions in the bacterial load within the canal system. Group A (NaOCl) achieved a post-irrigation mean CFU count of 1.9 million, reflecting a 96% reduction in bacterial load. Group B (CHX) recorded a mean CFU count of 6.7 million, corresponding to an 86% reduction. The difference in bacterial reduction between the two groups was statistically significant (<i>P</i> < 0.01), indicating that NaOCl was more effective than CHX as an irrigant.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Sodium hypochlorite proved to be more efficient than chlorhexidine in reducing microbial counts in root canals. While NaOCl appears to offer superior bacterial reduction, CHX, due to its substantivity and lower cytotoxicity, may still have valuable roles in particular clinical contexts.</p>","PeriodicalId":94339,"journal":{"name":"Journal of pharmacy & bioallied sciences","volume":"17 Suppl 1","pages":"S454-S456"},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12156664/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparative Analysis of Antimicrobial Efficacy of Sodium Hypochlorite and Chlorhexidine as Irrigants in Root Canal Therapy.\",\"authors\":\"L Karthik Prasad, Sheenam Markan, Mahishi G Suthar, Sweta Samal, Almazyad Yaser, Elaprolu Mallikarjun, Panthi Patel\",\"doi\":\"10.4103/jpbs.jpbs_1422_24\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>This research aims to analyze the antimicrobial efficacy of \\\"sodium hypochlorite (NaOCl)\\\" and \\\"chlorhexidine (CHX)\\\" as canal irrigants, evaluating their effects on bacterial load during \\\"Root canal treatment (RCT)\\\".</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>In this randomized controlled trial, 80 subjects requiring RCT were included. The participants were randomly allocated into two groups: Group A received 2.5% NaOCl as the irrigant, while Group B received 2% CHX. Microbial samples were gathered from the root canals using sterile paper points both before and after irrigation. The bacterial load was evaluated by counting \\\"colony-forming units (CFUs)\\\" following bacterial culture. Statistical analyzes were conducted using paired <i>t</i>-tests and ANOVA, with a significance level of <i>P</i> < 0.05.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Both NaOCl and CHX demonstrated substantial reductions in the bacterial load within the canal system. Group A (NaOCl) achieved a post-irrigation mean CFU count of 1.9 million, reflecting a 96% reduction in bacterial load. Group B (CHX) recorded a mean CFU count of 6.7 million, corresponding to an 86% reduction. The difference in bacterial reduction between the two groups was statistically significant (<i>P</i> < 0.01), indicating that NaOCl was more effective than CHX as an irrigant.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Sodium hypochlorite proved to be more efficient than chlorhexidine in reducing microbial counts in root canals. While NaOCl appears to offer superior bacterial reduction, CHX, due to its substantivity and lower cytotoxicity, may still have valuable roles in particular clinical contexts.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":94339,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of pharmacy & bioallied sciences\",\"volume\":\"17 Suppl 1\",\"pages\":\"S454-S456\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-05-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12156664/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of pharmacy & bioallied sciences\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4103/jpbs.jpbs_1422_24\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/2/25 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of pharmacy & bioallied sciences","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/jpbs.jpbs_1422_24","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/2/25 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:本研究旨在分析“次氯酸钠(NaOCl)”和“氯己定(CHX)”作为根管冲洗剂的抗菌效果,评价其在“根管治疗(RCT)”中对细菌负荷的影响。材料与方法:本随机对照试验纳入80例需要随机对照试验的受试者。受试者随机分为两组:A组灌胃2.5% NaOCl, B组灌胃2% CHX。在冲洗前后用无菌纸点从根管内采集微生物样本。通过计算细菌培养后的“菌落形成单位(cfu)”来评估细菌负荷。统计学分析采用配对t检验和方差分析,显著性水平P < 0.05。结果:NaOCl和CHX均能显著减少根管系统内的细菌负荷。A组(NaOCl)灌后平均CFU计数为190万,细菌负荷减少96%。B组(CHX)平均CFU计数为670万,减少了86%。两组间细菌减少量差异有统计学意义(P < 0.01),说明NaOCl冲洗效果优于CHX。结论:次氯酸钠在减少根管微生物数量方面比氯己定更有效。虽然NaOCl似乎具有优越的细菌减少作用,但CHX由于其实质性和较低的细胞毒性,可能在特定的临床环境中仍有重要作用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Comparative Analysis of Antimicrobial Efficacy of Sodium Hypochlorite and Chlorhexidine as Irrigants in Root Canal Therapy.

Objective: This research aims to analyze the antimicrobial efficacy of "sodium hypochlorite (NaOCl)" and "chlorhexidine (CHX)" as canal irrigants, evaluating their effects on bacterial load during "Root canal treatment (RCT)".

Materials and methods: In this randomized controlled trial, 80 subjects requiring RCT were included. The participants were randomly allocated into two groups: Group A received 2.5% NaOCl as the irrigant, while Group B received 2% CHX. Microbial samples were gathered from the root canals using sterile paper points both before and after irrigation. The bacterial load was evaluated by counting "colony-forming units (CFUs)" following bacterial culture. Statistical analyzes were conducted using paired t-tests and ANOVA, with a significance level of P < 0.05.

Results: Both NaOCl and CHX demonstrated substantial reductions in the bacterial load within the canal system. Group A (NaOCl) achieved a post-irrigation mean CFU count of 1.9 million, reflecting a 96% reduction in bacterial load. Group B (CHX) recorded a mean CFU count of 6.7 million, corresponding to an 86% reduction. The difference in bacterial reduction between the two groups was statistically significant (P < 0.01), indicating that NaOCl was more effective than CHX as an irrigant.

Conclusion: Sodium hypochlorite proved to be more efficient than chlorhexidine in reducing microbial counts in root canals. While NaOCl appears to offer superior bacterial reduction, CHX, due to its substantivity and lower cytotoxicity, may still have valuable roles in particular clinical contexts.

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
1.40
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