IN VITRO EVALUATION OF THE ANTIMICROBIAL EFFECT OF ENDOSEQUENCE BC AND AH PLUS ROOT CANAL SEALERS ON ENTEROCCOCUS FAECALIS

Document Type : Original Article

Authors

1 Conservative department, Alexandria university, Alexandria,Egypt

2 Lecturer of Microbiology, High Institute of Public Health, Alexandria University, Egypt

3 Associate Professor of Endodontics, Conservative Dentistry Department, Faculty of Dentistry, Alexandria University, Egypt

4 Professor of Endodontics, Department of Endodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, King Abdel Aziz University, KSA.

5 Professor of Endodontics, Conservative Dentistry Department, Faculty of Dentistry, Alexandria University, Egypt.

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Remaining microorganisms after chemo-mechanical cleaning and disinfection may be eliminated or rendered harmless by entombing them through complete obturation with gutta percha points and sealer. Adequate antimicrobial effect is of optimum importance to achieve root canal treatment success.
OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to investigate the antimicrobial potential of two types of sealers against Enterococcusfaecalis present in dentinal tubules, over a 30 day period.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Cells of Enterococcus faecalis were introduced into the dentinal tubules by incubation in brain-heart infusion broth for 3 weeks. AH Plus and Endosequence BioCeramic sealer (BC sealer) were coated on the root canal wall of the dentin specimens and cold lateral obturation technique was preformed, specimens were then stored for one, seven, and 30 days at 37°C. At the end of each incubation period, dentin powder was collected by sequential removal of dentin by the use of peeso reamers throughout the sample thickness, total bacterial count was assessed by Colony forming units (CFU) count.
RESULTS: No significant difference was observed in the total bacterial count among the three groups in day one. AH Plus showed statistically significant lower bacterial counts in comparison to the positive control group in day 7 and day 30, while Endosequence BC showed a statistically significant lower bacterial count in comparison to the positive control group at day 30.
CONCLUSIONS: AH plus exhibited a stronger antibacterial affect after setting and therefore is more effective than Endosequence BC in eliminating Enterococcus faecalis from the root canal system. In addition, both sealers lose their antibacterial effect with time.

Keywords

Main Subjects

References

1. Spångberg LS, Haapasalo M. Rationale and efficacy of root canal medicaments and root filling materials with emphasis on treatment outcome. Endod Topics. 2002;2:35-58.
2. Stuart CH, Schwartz SA, Beeson TJ, Owatz CB. Enterococcus faecalis: its role in root canal treatment failure and current concepts in retreatment. J Endod. 2006;32:93-8.
3. Kapralos V, Koutroulis A, Ørstavik D, Sunde PT, Rukke HV. Antibacterial activity of endodontic sealers against planktonic bacteria and bacteria in biofilms. J Endod. 2018;44:149-54.
4. Zhou HM, Shen Y, Zheng W, Li L, Zheng YF, Haapasalo M. Physical properties of 5 root canal sealers. J Endod. 2013;39:1281-6.
5. Zhang H, Shen Y, Ruse ND, Haapasalo M. Antibacterial activity of endodontic sealers by modified direct contact test against Enterococcus faecalis. J Endod. 2009;35:1051-5.
6. Saleh IM, Ruyter IE, Haapasalo M, Ørstavik D. Survival of Enterococcus faecalis in infected dentinal tubules after root canal filling with different root canal sealers in vitro. Int Endod J. 2004;37:193-8.
7. Vivacqua‐Gomes N, Gurgel‐Filho ED, Gomes BP, Ferraz CC, Zaia AA, Souza‐Filho FJ. Recovery of Enterococcus faecalis after single‐or multiple‐visit root canal treatments carried out in infected teeth ex vivo. Int Endod J. 2005;38:697-704.
8. Heling I, Chandler NP. The antimicrobial effect within dentinal tubules of four root canal sealers. J Endod. 1996;22:257-9.
9. I Spss I. IBM SPSS statistics version 21. Boston, Mass: IBM. Corp. 2012;126.
10.Field A. Discovering statistics using IBM SPSS statistics. sage; 2013.
11.Snecdecor GW, Cochran WG. Stat. Methods: Wiley; 1991.
12.Kruskal WH, Wallis WA. Use of ranks in one-criterion variance analysis. J. Am. Stat. Assoc. 1952;47:583-621.
13.Dunn OJ. Multiple comparisons using rank sums. Technometrics. 1964;6:241-52.
14.Haapasalo M, Ørstavik D. In vitro infection and of dentinal tubules. J Dent Res. 1987;66:1375-9.
15.Alyahya A, Alqareer A. Does the Removal of Cementum Facilitate Bacterial Penetration into Dentinal Tubules In Vitro?. J Endod. 2017;43:1111-5.
16.Ma J, Wang Z, Shen Y, Haapasalo M. A new noninvasive model to study the effectiveness of dentin disinfection by using confocal laser scanning microscopy. J Endod. 2011;37:1380-5.
17.Willershausen I, Callaway A, Briseño B, Willershausen B. In vitro analysis of the cytotoxicity and the antimicrobial effect of four endodontic sealers. Head Face Med. 2011;7:15.
18.Shin JH, Lee DY, Lee SH. Comparison of antimicrobial activity of traditional and new developed root sealers against pathogens related root canal. J Dent Sci. 2018;13:54-9.
19.Pizzo G, Giammanco GM, Cumbo E, Nicolosi G, Gallina G. In vitro antibacterial activity of endodontic sealers. J Dent. 2006;34:35-40.
20.Zhang H, Pappen FG, Haapasalo M. Dentin enhances the antibacterial effect of mineral trioxide aggregate and bioaggregate. J Endod. 2009;35:221-4.
21.Prasad MP. In-vitro antimicrobial evaluation of Endodontic cavity sealers against Enterococcus faecalis. IJIRSET. 2013;2:7662-6.
22.Wang Z, Shen Y, Haapasalo M. Dentin extends the antibacterial effect of endodontic sealers against Enterococcus faecalis biofilms. J Endod. 2014;40:505-8.
23.Du T, Wang Z, Shen Y, Ma J, Cao Y, Haapasalo M. Combined antibacterial effect of sodium hypochlorite and root canal sealers against Enterococcus faecalis biofilms in dentin canals. J Endod. 2015;41:1294-8.
24.Gomes BP, Pedroso JA, Jacinto RC, Vianna ME, Ferraz CC, Zaia AA, et al. In vitro evaluation of the antimicrobial activity of five root canal sealers. Braz Dent J. 2004;15:30-5.
25.Shakouie S, Esk M, Shahi S, FroughReihani M, Soroush M, Gosili A. Antimicrobial efficacy of AH-Plus, adseal and endofill against Enterococcus faecalis-An in vitro study. Afr J Microbiol Res. 2012;6:991-4..
26.Ustun Y, Sagsen B, Durmaz S, Percin D. In vitro antimicrobial efficiency of different root canal sealers against Enterecoccus faecalis. European J Gen Dent. 2013;2:134.
27.McHugh CP, Zhang P, Michalek S, Eleazer PD. pH required to kill Enterococcus faecalis in vitro. J Endod. 2004;30:218-9.
28.Haapasalo M, Qian W, Portenier I, Waltimo T. Effects of dentin on the antimicrobial properties of endodontic medicaments. J Endod. 2007;33:917-25.
29.Wang JD, Hume WR. Diffusion of hydrogen ion and hydroxyl ion from various sources through dentine. Int Endod J. 1988;21:17-26.
30.Urban K, Neuhaus J, Donnermeyer D, Schäfer E, Dammaschke T. Solubility and pH value of 3 different root canal sealers: a long-term investigation. J Endod. 2018;44:1736-40.
31.Leonardo MR, da Silva LA, Tanomaru Filho M, da Silva RS. Release of formaldehyde by 4 endodontic sealers. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 1999;88:221-5.
32.Zehnder M, Waltimo T, Sener B, Söderling E. Dentin enhances the effectiveness of bioactive glass S53P4 against a strain of Enterococcus faecalis. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2006;101:530-5.
33.Yang Q, Troczynski T, Liu DM. Influence of apatite seeds on the synthesis of calcium phosphate cement. Biomaterials. 2002;23:2751-60.
Alexandria Dental Journal
Volume 46, Issue 1
B (Endodontics, Prosthodontics, Fixed prosthodontics, Conservative dentistry, Dental Biomaterials)
April 2021
Pages 115-122

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics