Author/Authors :
Samiei, Mohammad Department of Endodontics - Dental and Periodontal Research Center - Dental School, Tabriz University of Medical Sciences, Tabriz , Shahi, Shahriar Department of Endodontics - Dental and Periodontal Research Center - Dental School, Tabriz University of Medical Sciences, Tabriz , Abdollahi, Amir Ardalan Department of Endodontics - Dental and Periodontal Research Center - Dental School, Tabriz University of Medical Sciences, Tabriz , Eskandarinezhad, Mahsa Department of Endodontics - Dental and Periodontal Research Center - Dental School, Tabriz University of Medical Sciences, Tabriz , Negahdari, Ramin Department of Prosthodontics - Dental and Periodontal Research Center - Dental School, Tabriz University of Medical Sciences, Tabriz , Pakseresht, Zahra Private Practice, Urmia
Abstract :
Introduction: This study compared the efficacy of light-activated low-power laser, 2%
chlorhexidine (CHX) and 2.5% NaOCl in eliminating Enterococcus faecalis (E. faecalis) from
the root canal system. Methods and Materials: The root canals of 60 maxillary central incisors
were contaminated with E. faecalis and then the bacteria were incubated for 24 h. All the root
canals were instrumented in a crown-down manner with #4 and 3 Gates-Glidden drills,
followed by RaCe rotary files (40/0.10, 35/0.08, and 30/0.06). The samples were randomly
assigned to three experimental groups and one control group (n=15). In the control group
no intervention was made. In the photo-activated disinfection (PAD) group, laser therapy
was undertaken with diode laser beams (with an output power of 100 mW/cm2) for 120 sec.
For the other two experimental groups, root canals were irrigated either with 5 mL of 2%
CHX or 2.5% NaOCl solutions, respectively. The Kruskal-Wallis test was used to compare
the CFU values of the bacteria and post-hoc Bonferroni test was used for pairwise
comparisons. The level of significance was set at 0.05. Results: The inhibition of bacterial
growth in all the experimental groups was significantly superior to the control group
(P<0.05). There was no significant difference between the effect of PAD and 2% CHX
(P=0.05). The effect of 2.5% NaOCl was significantly better than that of the PAD technique
(P<0.001). In addition, 2.5% NaOCl was significantly better than 2% CHX (P=0.007).
Conclusion: Photodynamic therapy was effective in reducing the E. faecalis counts in
comparison with the control group, but 2.5% NaOCl solution was the most effective protocol.
Keywords :
Enterococcus faecalis , Laser , Photo-Activated Disinfection , Photodynamic Therapy , Sodium Hypochlorite