G Kayaoglu1, H Erten, T Alaçam, D Ørstavik. 1. Department of Endodontics and Conservative Treatment, Faculty of Dentistry, Gazi University, Ankara, Turkey. guvenk@gazi.edu.tr
Abstract
AIM: To investigate the antimicrobial activity of root canal sealers on Enterococcus faecalis, either allowing or avoiding direct contact between sealers and bacteria. METHODOLOGY: Filter paper discs were immersed in standardized E. faecalis suspensions and exposed to freshly mixed sealers (MCS, AH Plus, Grossman's sealer, Sealapex, Apexit) in teflon wells for 30 min, with or without a filter membrane placed between filter paper discs and sealers (membrane-restricted contact test and direct contact test, respectively). After exposure, the filter paper discs were transferred to vials containing phosphate-buffered saline (PBS) and glass beads, and vigorously vortexed. PBS with resuspended bacterial cells was serially diluted and 25 microL droplets were seeded on TSA plates. The plates were incubated in air at 37 degrees C for 24 h and colony-forming units were counted. Using alpha = 0.05 as level for statistical significance, the data obtained were analysed using Student's t-test. RESULTS: In the direct contact test, MCS and AH Plus killed the bacteria to a level below the detection limit. They were followed in decreasing order of efficacy by Grossman's sealer, Sealapex and Apexit. In the membrane-restricted contact test, the sealers ranked: MCS, AH Plus, Grossman's sealer, Apexit and Sealapex, in descending order of antibacterial potency. MCS, AH Plus and Grossman's sealer significantly reduced the number of viable bacteria in both tests. Sealapex and Apexit were not statistically different from control. CONCLUSIONS: MCS, AH Plus and Grossman's sealer were effective in reducing the number of cultivable cells of E. faecalis. Calcium hydroxide-based sealers, Sealapex and Apexit were ineffective in this short-term experiment.
AIM: To investigate the antimicrobial activity of root canal sealers on Enterococcus faecalis, either allowing or avoiding direct contact between sealers and bacteria. METHODOLOGY: Filter paper discs were immersed in standardized E. faecalis suspensions and exposed to freshly mixed sealers (MCS, AH Plus, Grossman's sealer, Sealapex, Apexit) in teflon wells for 30 min, with or without a filter membrane placed between filter paper discs and sealers (membrane-restricted contact test and direct contact test, respectively). After exposure, the filter paper discs were transferred to vials containing phosphate-buffered saline (PBS) and glass beads, and vigorously vortexed. PBS with resuspended bacterial cells was serially diluted and 25 microL droplets were seeded on TSA plates. The plates were incubated in air at 37 degrees C for 24 h and colony-forming units were counted. Using alpha = 0.05 as level for statistical significance, the data obtained were analysed using Student's t-test. RESULTS: In the direct contact test, MCS and AH Plus killed the bacteria to a level below the detection limit. They were followed in decreasing order of efficacy by Grossman's sealer, Sealapex and Apexit. In the membrane-restricted contact test, the sealers ranked: MCS, AH Plus, Grossman's sealer, Apexit and Sealapex, in descending order of antibacterial potency. MCS, AH Plus and Grossman's sealer significantly reduced the number of viable bacteria in both tests. Sealapex and Apexit were not statistically different from control. CONCLUSIONS: MCS, AH Plus and Grossman's sealer were effective in reducing the number of cultivable cells of E. faecalis. Calcium hydroxide-based sealers, Sealapex and Apexit were ineffective in this short-term experiment.