AIM: To compare the antimicrobial efficacy of two-high power lasers (Nd:YAG and Er:YAG) and two commercial antimicrobial photodynamic therapy (aPDT) systems with that of sodium hypochlorite (NaOCl) action on Enterococcus faecalis biofilms grown on dentine discs. METHODOLOGY: Enterococcus faecalis biofilms were grown on dentine discs in a microtiter plate, incubated for 24 h and subjected to the following treatments: aPDT (Denfotex and Helbo system), Er:YAG laser irradiation (2940 nm, 50 mJ or 100 mJ, 15 Hz, 40 s), Nd:YAG laser irradiation (1064 nm, 2 W, 15 Hz, 40 s) and immersion in 2.5% (w/v) NaOCl for 1, 5, 10 and 30 min. Surviving bacteria were harvested, and the number of CFU per disc was determined by plate counting. RESULTS: Significant reductions (anova, P ≤ 0.05) in viable counts were observed for aPDT (Helbo) (2 log(10) reduction), Er:YAG irradiation using 100 mJ pulses (4.3 log(10) reduction) and all NaOCl treatments (>6 log(10) reduction). NaOCl (2.5%) for 5 min effectively eliminated all bacteria. aPDT (Denfotex), Er:YAG irradiation using 50 mJ pulses and Nd:YAG treatment caused a reduction in the viable counts of <1 log(10) unit; these results were not significantly different from the untreated controls. CONCLUSION: Within the limitations of this particular laboratory set-up, NaOCl was the most effective in E. faecalis biofilm elimination, while Er:YAG laser treatment (100 mJ pulses) also resulted in high reductions in viable counts. The use of both commercial aPDT systems resulted in a weak reduction in the number of E. faecalis cells. Nd:YAG irradiation was the least effective.
AIM: To compare the antimicrobial efficacy of two-high power lasers (Nd:YAG and Er:YAG) and two commercial antimicrobial photodynamic therapy (aPDT) systems with that of sodium hypochlorite (NaOCl) action on Enterococcus faecalis biofilms grown on dentine discs. METHODOLOGY:Enterococcus faecalis biofilms were grown on dentine discs in a microtiter plate, incubated for 24 h and subjected to the following treatments: aPDT (Denfotex and Helbo system), Er:YAG laser irradiation (2940 nm, 50 mJ or 100 mJ, 15 Hz, 40 s), Nd:YAG laser irradiation (1064 nm, 2 W, 15 Hz, 40 s) and immersion in 2.5% (w/v) NaOCl for 1, 5, 10 and 30 min. Surviving bacteria were harvested, and the number of CFU per disc was determined by plate counting. RESULTS: Significant reductions (anova, P ≤ 0.05) in viable counts were observed for aPDT (Helbo) (2 log(10) reduction), Er:YAG irradiation using 100 mJ pulses (4.3 log(10) reduction) and all NaOCl treatments (>6 log(10) reduction). NaOCl (2.5%) for 5 min effectively eliminated all bacteria. aPDT (Denfotex), Er:YAG irradiation using 50 mJ pulses and Nd:YAG treatment caused a reduction in the viable counts of <1 log(10) unit; these results were not significantly different from the untreated controls. CONCLUSION: Within the limitations of this particular laboratory set-up, NaOCl was the most effective in E. faecalis biofilm elimination, while Er:YAG laser treatment (100 mJ pulses) also resulted in high reductions in viable counts. The use of both commercial aPDT systems resulted in a weak reduction in the number of E. faecalis cells. Nd:YAG irradiation was the least effective.
Authors: Anna Ossmann; Stefan Kranz; Guellmar Andre; Andrea Völpel; Volker Albrecht; Alfred Fahr; Bernd W Sigusch Journal: Clin Oral Investig Date: 2014-06-21 Impact factor: 3.573