Citation Information :
Jambagi N, Kore P, Dhaded NS, Patil SA, Shankar M. Comparison of Antimicrobial Efficacy of Diode Laser, Ultrasonic Activated and Conventional Irrigation with 2.5% NaOCl during RCT: An Interventional Study. J Contemp Dent Pract 2021; 22 (6):669-673.
Aim and objective: The aim and objective of the study was to evaluate and compare the antimicrobial efficacy of a diode laser irradiation, ultrasonic activated and conventional irrigation with 2.5% NaOCl on obligatory and facultative anaerobic bacteria in single-rooted canals.
Materials and methods: Total of 60 permanent maxillary and mandibular single-rooted (single canal) anterior teeth were selected. First microbial sample (S1) was collected after access opening and working length determination, using a sterile paper point. Cleaning and shaping were performed, with each instrument change accompanied by irrigation using 2 mL 2.5% NaOCl. After cleaning and shaping, disinfection protocol using diode laser (group1), ultrasonic activated irrigation with 2.5% NaOCl (group 2) and conventional irrigation with 2.5% NaOCl (group 3) was performed and second microbial sample (S2) was obtained. The colony characters of each type of growth on each media were noted and the organisms were identified using standard biochemical reactions.
Result: Gram-positive and gram-negative facultative anaerobe were predominantly isolated from the culture, and the highest reduction of the microbial count was seen in diode laser group with 60.92% followed by the ultrasonic group with 47.22% reduction and least reduction was observed in conventional irrigation with the ultrasonic group with 37.97%. The results were statistically significant with p-value <0.05.
Conclusion: Diode laser disinfection showed the highest reduction of microbial count compared to ultrasonic activated and conventional needle irrigation with 2.5% NaOCl group.
Clinical significance: This study will help us to choose wisely between various irrigating methods and protocols. Diode laser in our study has shown superior disinfection of the root canals compared to others.
Liu H, Wei X, Ling J, et al. Biofilm formation capability of Enterococcus faecalis cells in starvation phase and its susceptibility to sodium hypochlorite. J Endod 2009;36(4):630–635. DOI: 10.1016/j.joen.2009.11.016.
Shehab FS, Alshamaa ZA, Taha MY. Evaluation of antibacterial efficacy of elexxion diode laser 810 nm on the infected root canals: an vitro and an vivo study. Int J Dent Sci Res 2013;1(2):23–27. DOI: 10.12691/ijdsr-1-2-1.
Haapasalo M, Endal U, Zandi H, et al. Eradication of endodontic infection by instrumentation and irrigation solutions. Endod Topics 2005;10:77–102. DOI: 10.1111/j.1601-1546.2005.00135.x.
Bago I, Plecko V, Gabric Panduric D, et al. Antimicrobial efficacy of a high-power diode laser, photo-activated disinfection, conventional and sonic activated irrigation during root canal treatment. Int Endod J 2013;46(4):339–347. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2591.2012.02120.x.
Oliveira DP, Barbizam JV, Trope M, et al. In vitro antibacterial efficacy of endodontic irrigants against Enterococcus faecalis. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 2006;103(5):702–706. DOI: 10.1016/j.tripleo.2006.11.007.
Gu LS, Kim JR, Ling J, et al. Review of contemporary irrigant agitation techniques and devices. J Endod 2009;35(6):791–804. DOI: 10.1016/j.joen.2009.03.010.
Pirnat S. Versatility of an 810 nm diode laser in dentistry: an overview. J Laser Health Academy 2007;2007(4):1–9.
Tilakchand M, Singh NN, Yeli M, et al. Evaluation of the antibacterial efficacy of EZLASE diode LASER on the infected root canal system: an in vivo study. J Conserv Dent 2018;21(3):306–310. DOI: 10.4103/JCD.JCD_14_18.
Ng YL, Spratt D, Sriskantharajah S, et al. Evaluation of protocols for field decontamination before bacterial sampling of root canals for contemporary microbiology techniques. J Endod 2003;29(5):317–320. DOI: 10.1097/00004770-200305000-00001.
Dahlen G. Culture based analysis of endodontic infection. In: Endodontic microbiology. 2nd ed. 2017. p. 51–79.
Troy DB, Beringer P. Williams L. Wilkins. Remington science and practice of pharmacy, vol. 1. 21st ed. 2006.
Svec TA, Harrison JW. Chemomechanical removal of pulpal and dentinal debris with sodium hypochlorite and hydrogen peroxide vs normal saline solution. J Endod 1977;3(2):49–53. DOI: 10.1016/S0099-2399(77)80015-0.
Vianna ME, Horz HP, Gomes BP, et al. In vivo evaluation of microbial reduction after chemo-mechanical preparation of human root canals containing necrotic pulp tissue Int Endod J 2006;39(6):484–492. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2591.2006.01121.x.
Bystrom A, Sundqvist G. Bacteriologic evaluation of the efficacy of mechanical root canal instrumentation in endodontic therapy. Scand J Dent Res 1981;89(4):321–328. DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-0722.1981.tb01689.x.
Zehnder M. Root canal irrigants. J Endod 2006;32(5):389–398. DOI: 10.1016/j.joen.2005.09.014.
Boutsioukis C, Gogos C, Verhaagen B, et al. The effect of apical preparation size on irrigant flow in root canals evaluated using an unsteady Computational Fluid Dynamics model. Int Endod J 2010;43(10):874–881. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2591.2010.01761.x.
Van der Sluis LW, Versluis M, Wu MK, et al. Passive ultrasonic irrigation of the root canal: a review of the literature. Int Endod J 2007;40(6):415–426. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2591.2007.01243.x.
Mathew J, Emil J, Paulaian B, et al. Viability and antibacterial efficacy of four root canal disinfection techniques evaluated using confocal laser scanning microscopy J Conserv Dent 2014;17(5):444–448. DOI: 10.4103/0972-0707.139833.
Preethee T, Kandaswamy D, Arathi G, et al. Bactericidal effect of the 908 nm diode laser on Enterococcus faecalis in infected root canals. J Conserv Dent 2012;15(1):46–50. DOI: 10.4103/0972-0707.92606.