He Liu1,2, Heng Li1, Lei Zhang1, Zhejun Wang2, Junrong Qian1, Miao Yu3, Ya Shen4. 1. Department of Stomatology, Affiliated Hospital of Jining Medical University, Jining, People's Republic of China. 2. Division of Endodontics, Department of Oral Biological and Medical Sciences, Faculty of Dentistry, University of British Columbia, 2199 Wesbrook Mall, Vancouver, V6T 1Z3, Canada. 3. Department of Periodontics, Guangdong Engineering Research Center of Oral Restoration and Reconstruction, Guangzhou Key Laboratory of Basic and Applied Research of Oral Regenerative Medicine, Affiliated Stomatology Hospital of Guangzhou Medical University, Guangzhou, Guangdong, 510182, People's Republic of China. yu_miaomiao@163.com. 4. Division of Endodontics, Department of Oral Biological and Medical Sciences, Faculty of Dentistry, University of British Columbia, 2199 Wesbrook Mall, Vancouver, V6T 1Z3, Canada. yashen@dentistry.ubc.ca.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To dynamically evaluate the effect of four root canal sealers on the killing of biofilms within dentinal tubules. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Dentin blocks were prepared for infection of the dentinal tubules. Enterococcus faecalis VP3-181 and multi-species bacteria from two donors were cultured. After 3 days of incubation, the infected dentin specimens were rinsed with sterile water for 1 min and subjected to treatment. Additionally, multi-species bacteria from donor 1 were incubated for 3 weeks to allow biofilm maturation and then the specimens were subjected to treatment. Gutta-percha-treated dentin specimens comprised the control group. A root canal sealer (bioceramic sealers: EndoSequence BC Sealer, ProRoot Endo Sealer, or GuttaFlow Bioseal; and a traditional silicone-based sealer: Guttaflow 2) was spread onto the canal walls of the dentin. The specimens were examined with confocal laser scanning microscopy at 7, 30, or 60 days. RESULTS: In the 3-day-old biofilm group, the proportion of killed bacteria decreased significantly from the first 7 days of treatment to 60 days of treatment for all sealers (p < 0.05). In the 3-week-old biofilm group, 60 days of exposure to bioceramic sealers resulted in more significant dead bacteria than 7-day exposures of the biofilms (p < 0.05). Bioceramic sealers were more effective in killing bacteria than the GuttaFlow 2 sealer (p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Calcium silicate-based sealers showed good antimicrobial effects against biofilms within dentinal tubules, especially in the first week in young biofilms. There is no substantive antibacterial activity observed for the examined root canal sealers against young dentinal tubule biofilms. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: The bioceramic root canal sealers examined demonstrate minimal additional antibacterial effects after long-term exposure to young biofilms.
OBJECTIVES: To dynamically evaluate the effect of four root canal sealers on the killing of biofilms within dentinal tubules. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Dentin blocks were prepared for infection of the dentinal tubules. Enterococcus faecalis VP3-181 and multi-species bacteria from two donors were cultured. After 3 days of incubation, the infected dentin specimens were rinsed with sterile water for 1 min and subjected to treatment. Additionally, multi-species bacteria from donor 1 were incubated for 3 weeks to allow biofilm maturation and then the specimens were subjected to treatment. Gutta-percha-treated dentin specimens comprised the control group. A root canal sealer (bioceramic sealers: EndoSequence BC Sealer, ProRoot Endo Sealer, or GuttaFlow Bioseal; and a traditional silicone-based sealer: Guttaflow 2) was spread onto the canal walls of the dentin. The specimens were examined with confocal laser scanning microscopy at 7, 30, or 60 days. RESULTS: In the 3-day-old biofilm group, the proportion of killed bacteria decreased significantly from the first 7 days of treatment to 60 days of treatment for all sealers (p < 0.05). In the 3-week-old biofilm group, 60 days of exposure to bioceramic sealers resulted in more significant dead bacteria than 7-day exposures of the biofilms (p < 0.05). Bioceramic sealers were more effective in killing bacteria than the GuttaFlow 2 sealer (p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Calcium silicate-based sealers showed good antimicrobial effects against biofilms within dentinal tubules, especially in the first week in young biofilms. There is no substantive antibacterial activity observed for the examined root canal sealers against young dentinal tubule biofilms. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: The bioceramic root canal sealers examined demonstrate minimal additional antibacterial effects after long-term exposure to young biofilms.
Authors: B P Huffman; S Mai; L Pinna; R N Weller; C M Primus; J L Gutmann; D H Pashley; F R Tay Journal: Int Endod J Date: 2009-01 Impact factor: 5.264
Authors: Ya Shen; Jia Zhao; César de la Fuente-Núñez; Zhejun Wang; Robert E W Hancock; Clive R Roberts; Jingzhi Ma; Jun Li; Markus Haapasalo; Qi Wang Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2016-06-21 Impact factor: 4.379