| Literature DB >> 35448053 |
Charley Provoost1, Giovanni Tommaso Rocca1, Anna Thibault1, Pierre Machtou1, Serge Bouilllaguet1.
Abstract
This study aimed to evaluate the influence of needle design and irrigant flow rate on the removal of Enterococcus faecalis mature biofilms during sodium hypochlorite irrigation. Forty-eight single-rooted human teeth were instrumented (ProTaper F3), autoclaved and inoculated with Enterococcus faecalis to establish a two-week-old biofilm. E. faecalis biofilms were treated with Sodium hypochlorite that was injected in the root canals using three types of needles (NaviTip, ProRinse, IrriFlex). For the IrriFlex needle, one, two, or four bars of pressure was applied to the irrigating solution to increase flow rates. Bacteria were labeled with the LIVE/DEAD BacLight Bacterial Viability kit, and viability was assessed by flow cytometry (FCM). Results were statistically analyzed using one-way ANOVA and Tukey multiple comparison intervals (α = 0.05). Bacterial viability was significantly reduced after sodium hypochlorite passive irrigation but the number of viable bacteria retrieved from root canal specimens irrigated with the Pro-Rinse needle was significantly higher compared to NaviTip and IrriFlex needles (p < 0.05). When the irrigant flow rate was increased, the viability of bacterial biofilms was significantly reduced compared to passive irrigation using the IrriFlex needle (p < 0.05). Applying higher flow rates during irrigation using the IrriFlex needle did not further reduce bacterial viability.Entities:
Keywords: E. faecalis biofilms; endodontic irrigation; needle
Year: 2022 PMID: 35448053 PMCID: PMC9030241 DOI: 10.3390/dj10040059
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Dent J (Basel) ISSN: 2304-6767
Figure 1Model used to establish a two-week-old bacterial biofilm. The culture medium was circulated using the peristaltic pump and renewed at different time intervals to remove dead bacteria and debris. Each root sample was used separately for the irrigation procedures.
Figure 2Bacterial viability after passive irrigation using NaviTip, IrriFlex and ProRinse needles. Letters indicate statistical differences among groups (ANOVA, Tukey, 0.05).
Figure 3Bacterial viability after passive irrigation using IrriFlex needle or after irrigation under pressure of 1,2 or 4 Bar. Letters indicate statistical differences among groups (ANOVA, Tukey, 0.05).