The Journal of Contemporary Dental Practice

Register      Login

SEARCH WITHIN CONTENT

FIND ARTICLE

Volume / Issue

Online First

Archive
Related articles

VOLUME 21 , ISSUE 12 ( December, 2020 ) > List of Articles

ORIGINAL RESEARCH

Comparative Evaluation of the Efficacy of Novel Root Canal Irrigation Techniques on Reduction of Enterococcus faecalis Count: An In Vitro Study

Sabari Murugesan, Arasappan Rajakumaran, Buggaveeti Pradeep Kumar, Arumugam Balatandayoudam, Purushotham Mohankumar, N Bharath Naga Reddy

Keywords : Dynamic irrigation needle irrigation, E. faecalis endoactivator, Endovac

Citation Information : Murugesan S, Rajakumaran A, Kumar BP, Balatandayoudam A, Mohankumar P, Reddy NB. Comparative Evaluation of the Efficacy of Novel Root Canal Irrigation Techniques on Reduction of Enterococcus faecalis Count: An In Vitro Study. J Contemp Dent Pract 2020; 21 (12):1379-1383.

DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10024-2966

License: CC BY-NC 4.0

Published Online: 13-04-2021

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2020; Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) Ltd.


Abstract

Aim and objective: To compare the effectiveness of three irrigation systems, namely, Endovac system, Max I probe, and Navitip FX, in reduction of Enterococcus faecalis population from the root canal using agar diffusion method. Materials and methods: Fifty-five extracted intact human permanent maxillary anterior teeth were selected for this study. In group I, root canals were irrigated using brush covered 30-gauge NaviTipFX. Ultradent in group II root canals was irrigated using brush covered 30-gauge Max-I-Probe Dentsply. In group III, root canals were irrigated using Endoactivator, Dentsply. In group IV, root canal was irrigated by using the Endovac system Sybronendo. The steps followed in the study include preparation of specimen, contamination of the samples followed by conduction of testing procedures with implementation of appropriate irrigation protocols, and sampling procedures. Results: Data were subjected to statistical analysis to interpret the significant differences among various irrigation systems. One-way analysis of variance, Post hoc Tukey tests were used for statistical analysis in the present study. Among the experimental groups, group IV showed statistically significant difference in reduction of E. faecalis. There were no statistical differences between them in reduction of E. faecalis in group I and group II compared and represented in Tables 1 and 2. Conclusion: All four irrigation delivery systems have been found to be effective in the reduction of E. faecalis. Endovac showed comparable efficacy in reduction of colony-forming units to that of other delivery systems used in the study. The result has to be validated with in vivo studies and clinical trials of larger sample size. Clinical significance: Selection of appropriate irrigation system capable of disinfection of canal complexities in apical third with less adverse effects is essential for good clinical success of endodontic treatment.


PDF Share
  1. Pathways of the pulp. 9th ed., St. Louis: Mosby Elsevier; 2006.
  2. Efficacy of a new brush-covered irrigation needle in removing root canal debris: a scanning electron microscopic study. J Endod 2006;32(12):1181–1184. DOI: 10.1016/j.joen.2006.07.019.
  3. Evaluation of the effectiveness of sodium hypochlorite used with three irrigation methods in the elimination of Enterococcus faecalis from the root canal, in vitro. Int Endod J 1997;30(4):279–282. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2591.1997.tb00708.x.
  4. Enterococcus faecalis–a mechanism for its role in endodontic failure. Int Endod J 2001;34(5):399–405. DOI: 10.1046/j.1365-2591.2001.00437.x.
  5. Effect of vapor lock on root canal debridement by using a side-vented needle for positive-pressure irrigant delivery. J Endod 2010;36(4):745–750. DOI: 10.1016/j.joen.2009.11.022.
  6. Review of contemporary irrigant agitation techniques and devices. J Endod 2009;35(6):791–804. DOI: 10.1016/j.joen.2009.03.010.
  7. Comparison of the effectiveness of three irrigation techniques in reducing intracanal Enterococcus faecalis populations: an in vitro study. J Endod 2009;35(10):1422–1427. DOI: 10.1016/j.joen.2009.07.001.
  8. Effect of apical preparation size and preparation taper on irrigant volume delivered by using negative pressure irrigation system. J Endod 2010;36(4):721–724. DOI: 10.1016/j.joen.2009.11.028.
  9. In vitro antibacterial effect of different irriation solutions on Enterococcus faecalis. Acta Odonta Lactinam 2006;19:75–80.
  10. Mechanical preparation of root canals: shaping goals, techniques and means. Endodontic topics 2005;10(1):30–76. DOI: 10.1111/j.1601-1546.2005.00152.x.
  11. The antibacterial action of sodium hypochlorite and EDTA in 60 cases of endodontic therapy. Int Endod J 1985;18(1):35–40. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2591.1985.tb00416.x.
  12. The principles of techniques for cleaning root canals. Aust Dent J 2007;52:S52–S63. DOI: 10.1111/j.1834-7819.2007.tb00526.x.
  13. Clinical implications and microbiology of bacterial persistence after treatment procedures. J Endod 2008;34(11):1291–1301. DOI: 10.1016/j.joen.2008.07.028.
  14. Root canal irrigants. J Endodontics 2006;32(5):389–398. DOI: 10.1016/j.joen.2005.09.014.
  15. Effect of EDTA and NaOCl on E. faecalis biofilm colonization in young and old human root canal dentin: in vitro study. J Endod 2010;36(5):842–846. DOI: 10.1016/j.joen.2010.01.008.
  16. Postoperative pain after the application of two different irrigation devices in a prospective randomized clinical trial. J Endod 2010;36(8):1295–1301. DOI: 10.1016/j.joen.2010.04.012.
  17. Apical pressures developed by needles for canal irrigation. J Endodont 2002;28(4):333–335. DOI: 10.1097/00004770-200204000-00019.
  18. Canal and isthmus debridement efficacies of two irrigant agitation techniques in a closed system. Int Endod J 2010;43(12):1077–1090. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2591.2010.01778.x.
  19. An ex vivo evaluation of a new root canal irrigation technique with intracanal aspiration. Int Endod J 2006;39(2):93–99. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2591.2006.01050.x.
  20. Enterococcus faecalis: its role in root canal treatment failure and current concepts in retreatment. J Endod 2006;32(2):93–98. DOI: 10.1016/j.joen.2005.10.049.
  21. Influence of instrument size on root canal debridement. J Endod 2004;30(2):110–112. DOI: 10.1097/00004770-200402000-00012.
  22. Evaluation of irrigant flow in the root canal using different needle types by an unsteady computational fluid dynamics model. J Endod 2010;36(5):875–879. DOI: 10.1016/j.joen.2009.12.026.
  23. Comparative safety of various intracanal irrigation systems. J Endod 2009;35(4):545–549. DOI: 10.1016/j.joen.2009.01.011.
  24. Eradication of endodontic infection by instrumentation and irrigation solutions. Endodontic topics 2005;10(1):77–102. DOI: 10.1111/j.1601-1546.2005.00135.x.
  25. Comparison of the Endovac system to needle irrigation of root canals. J Endod 2007;33(5):611–615. DOI: 10.1016/j.joen.2007.01.020.
  26. Influence of irrigating needle-tip designs in removing bacteria inoculated into instrumented root canals measured using single-tube luminometer. J Endod 2007;33(6):746. DOI: 10.1016/j.joen.2007.02.013.
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.