Comparison of conventional and contemporary root canal disinfection protocols against bacteria, lipoteichoic acid (LTA), and lipopolysaccharide (LPS)

传统和现代根管消毒方案对抗细菌、脂磷壁酸 (LTA) 和脂多糖 (LPS) 的比较

阅读:5
作者:Theeb A Alquria, Rayyan A Alfirdous, Swati Gupta, Mauro P Santamaria, Ingrid F Santamaria, Ana P M Gomes, Naiara Tiradentes, Eduardo G Silva, Frederico C Martinho

Abstract

This study devised a dual-species biofilm model to investigate bacteria, lipoteichoic acid (LTA), and lipopolysaccharide (LPS) simultaneously, and compared the efficacy of conventional and contemporary disinfection protocols. Seventy single-rooted mandibular premolars were included. Fourteen teeth were negative control, and 56 teeth were infected with 3-week-old E. faecalis and E. coli GFP biofilm. Fourteen/56 teeth were positive control, with seven teeth processed for CLSM analysis and seven teeth sampled with paper points (PPs) and cryogenically ground for bacterial, LTA, and LPS analyses. Forty-two teeth were randomly divided into three groups: GWS (GentleWave system) + MIT (minimally invasive technique), PUI (passive ultrasonic irrigation) + CIT (conventional instrumentation technique), and XP-EF (XP-endo Finisher) + CIT (All, n = 14). Samples were collected before (s1) and after disinfection (s2) with PPs and after cryogenically ground (s3). CFUs were counted, and LTA and LPS were quantified with LTA-ELISA and LAL assay, respectively. XP-EF was as effective as PUI (p > 0.05). GWS + MIT was the most effective disinfection protocol against bacteria, LTA, and LPS (p < 0.05). In conclusion, PUI, XP-EF, and GWS were highly effective against bacteria, LTA, and LPS, with GWS being the most effective.

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。