Antibacterial efficacy of quaternary ammonium compounds (QACs) against Enterococcus faecalis in endodontic infections: a systematic review and meta-analysis

季铵化合物(QACs)对根管感染中粪肠球菌的抗菌疗效:系统评价和荟萃分析

阅读:1

Abstract

BACKGROUND: This systematic review aims to assess the antibacterial efficacy of Quaternary Ammonium Compounds (QACs) against Enterococcus faecalis (E. faecalis) as a root canal irrigant for endodontic infections. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A comprehensive literature search was conducted utilizing the databases PubMed, Scopus, Cochrane library and Google Scholar for papers from January 2000 up until January 2024. The research question was formulated using the PICO (Population, Intervention, Control and Outcomes) framework. This review focused on the efficacy of QACs (intervention) against E. faecalis (population) and compare it with NaOCl (comparator 1) and CHX (comparator 2) for antibacterial activity by using findings of colony forming unit (CFU) and confocal laser microscopy (CLSM) (outcomes). A methodological quality assessment was conducted using a scoring methodology provided by Quin tool to evaluate the studies, and the risk of bias was examined. A systematic screening of the selected publications was performed based on predefined inclusion criteria to identify studies eligible for meta-analysis. RESULTS: Nine research studies papers included varied in their design and had a low to medium risk of bias. The findings demonstrated a decrease in the number of E. faecalis bacteria following the inclusion of QACs, leading to improved disinfection and efficacy in combating root canal infections. Furthermore, the meta-analysis findings indicated that there was no statistically significant distinction (p > 0.05) in the efficacy of QACs [Quaternary ammonium silane (K21) and Benzalkonium chloride (BAK)] when compared to commercially available NaOCl, however these QACs showed high efficacy against E. faecalis. CONCLUSION: This review found QACs to be promising alternatives to NaOCl and CHX for E. faecalis elimination, though no significant difference was observed in meta-analysis due to study heterogeneity. Standardized in vivo studies are needed for validation. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NO: CRD42023389258. CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER: not applicable.

特别声明

1、本页面内容包含部分的内容是基于公开信息的合理引用;引用内容仅为补充信息,不代表本站立场。

2、若认为本页面引用内容涉及侵权,请及时与本站联系,我们将第一时间处理。

3、其他媒体/个人如需使用本页面原创内容,需注明“来源:[生知库]”并获得授权;使用引用内容的,需自行联系原作者获得许可。

4、投稿及合作请联系:info@biocloudy.com。