Evaluation of Antibacterial Efficacy of Two Commercially Available Probiotics as Intracanal Medicament against Enterococcus faecalis: An In Vitro Study
Keywords :
Antimicrobial, Bacteriotherapy, Bifidobacterium, Endodontics, Innovative, Lactobacillus rhamnosus, Probiotics, Zone of inhibition
Citation Information :
Ravi S, Ananthan HB, Reddy BN, Sankar S, Natarajan SN, Sankar S. Evaluation of Antibacterial Efficacy of Two Commercially Available Probiotics as Intracanal Medicament against Enterococcus faecalis: An In Vitro Study. J Contemp Dent Pract 2023; 24 (3):157-161.
Aim: This study was performed to evaluate the antibacterial efficacy of two commercially available probiotics (BIFILAC and VSL 3) as intracanal medicament against Enterococcus faecalis in endodontic therapy.
Materials and methods: Microorganisms from commercially available probiotics (BIFILAC and VSL 3) were extracted via the manufacturer's recommendations and mixed by weight. About 30 microliters were then placed on sterile discs. The pathogenic test organism was E. faecalis set to a 1 McFarland standard challenge. A two-probiotic disc template on blood agar plates was inoculated with E. faecalis and incubated at 37°C for 48 hours and 1 week respectively. Phase-1 of the study was conducted by a disc diffusion assay test to evaluate zones of inhibition (ZOI) in millimeters (mm). Phase-2 was conducted by mixing 9 mL of 30% poloxamer 407 and MRS broth in a test tube, together with the two probiotic mixtures and E. faecalis, set at a 2 McFarland standard. Serial dilutions up to 108 were done and the mixture was placed inside root canals and incubated at 37°C for 36 hours and evaluated for colony-forming unit (CFU)/mL counts.
Results: The results of phase-1 showed that probiotics Lactobacillus rhamnosus and Bifidobacterium species are effective in fighting against E. faecalis with the acceptable zone of inhibition. The results of phase-2 showed that both the probiotics are effective against E. faecalis with a reduction in the number of CFU after probiotic usage.
Conclusion: Commercially available probiotics can be used effectively as an intracanal medicament to fight against E. faecalis, Poloxamer 407 is a promising vehicle for delivering probiotics inside the root canal system. Further in vitro and in vivo studies are needed to determine the full potential of “Bacteriotherapy” with an application of probiotics.
Clinical significance: If probiotics are proved to be an effective intracanal medicament against E.faecalis they can be used as an alternative to calcium hydroxide as intracanal medicament with no side effects to the host.
Bohora A, Kokate S. Concept of probiotics in endodontics. Int J Adv Res 2016;4:1137–1142. DOI: 10.21474/IJAR01/966.
Siqueira Jr JF. Aetiology of root canal treatment failure: Why well-treated teeth can fail. Int Endod J 2001;34(1):1–10. DOI: 10.1046/j.1365-2591.2001.00396.x.
Hawrelak J, BNat (Hons). Probiotics. In: Pizzorno JE, Murray MT, (Eds). Textbook of Natural Medicine. 4th edition. Missouri: Elsevier; 2013. pp. 979–994.
Lilly DM, Stillwell RH. Probotics: Growth-promoting factors produced by microorganisms. Science 1965;147(3659):747–748. DOI: 10.1126/science.147.3659.747.
Chen LA, Sears CL. Prebiotics, probiotics, and synbiotics. In: Bennett JE, Dolin R, Blaser MJ, (Eds). Mandell, Douglas, and Bennett's Principles and Practice of Infectious Diseases. 8th edition. Philadelphia, PA: Saunders Elsevier; 2015. p. 19–25.e1.
Bohora A, Kokate S. Evaluation of the role of probiotics in endodontic treatment: A preliminary study. J Int Soc Prev Community Dent 2017;7(1):46–51. DOI: 10.4103/2231-0762.200710.
Al-Dajani M, and Limeback H. Emerging science in the dietary control and prevention of dental caries. J Calif Dent Assoc 2012;40(10): 799–804. PMID: 23316561.
Grover HS, and Luthra S. Probiotics–The nano soldiers of oral health. Journal of Indian Academy of Clinical Medicine. 2012(13):49.
Estrela C, Holland R, Estrela CR, et al. Characterization of successful root canal treatment. Braz Dent J 2014;25(1):3–11. DOI: 10.1590/0103-6440201302356.
Pinheiro ET, Gomes BP, Drucker DB, et al. Antimicrobial susceptibility of Enterococcus faecalis isolated from canals of root filled teeth with periapical lesions. Int Endod J 2004;37(11):756–763. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2591.2004.00865.x.
Lolayekar NV, Bhat VS, Bhat SS. Disinfection methods of extracted human teeth. J Oral Health Comm Dent 2007;1(2):27–29. DOI: 10.5005/johcd-1-2-27.
Menon AM. Implications of probiotics on oral health: Past-to-present. J Dent Res Rev 2016;3(1):36–41. DOI: 10.4103/2348-2915.180118.
Haukioja A, Knuuttila YH, Loimaranta V, et al. Oral adhesion and survival of probiotic and other lactobacilli and bifidobacteria in-vitro. Oral Microbiol Immunol 2006;21(5): 326–332. DOI: 10.1111/j.1399-302X.2006.00299.x.
Lodi CS, Manarelli MM, Sassaki KT, et al. Evaluation of fermented milk containing probiotic on dental enamel and biofilm: In situ study. Arch Oral Biol 2010;55(1):29–33. DOI: 10.1016/j.archoralbio.2009.10.009.
Näse L, Hatakka K, Savilahti E, et al. Effect of long–term consumption of a probiotic bacterium, Lactobacillus rhamnosus GG, in milk on dental caries and caries risk in children. Caries Res 2001;35(6):412–420. DOI: 10.1159/000047484.
Bohora AA, Kokate SR. Good bugs vs bad bugs: Evaluation of inhibitory effect of selected probiotics against Enterococcus faecalis. J Contemp Dent Pract 2017;18(4):312–316. DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10024-2037.
Berwal V, Ahuja K, Pal N, et al. Probiotics in dental domain: A review. Int J Appl Dent Sci 2017;3(4):114–117.
Cosme-Silva L, Dal-Fabbro R, Cintra LT, et al. Reduced bone resorption and inflammation in apical periodontitis evoked by dietary supplementation with probiotics in rats. Int Endod J 2020. DOI: 10.1111/iej.13311.
Çaglar E, Sandalli N, Twetman S, et al. Effect of yogurt with Bifidobacterium DN-173 010 on salivary mutans streptococci and lactobacilli in young adults. Acta Odontologica Scandinavica 2005;63(6):317–320. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/00016350510020070.
