Bacterial killing by several root filling materials and methods in an ex vivo infected root canal model

Basit Öğe Kaydı
dc.contributor.authorOzcan, E.
dc.contributor.authorEldeniz, A. U.
dc.contributor.authorAri, H.
dc.date.accessioned2020-03-26T18:13:50Z
dc.date.available2020-03-26T18:13:50Z
dc.date.issued2011
dc.departmentSelçuk Üniversitesien_US
dc.description.abstractOzcan E, Eldeniz AU, Ari H. Bacterial killing by several root filling materials and methods in an ex vivo infected root canal model. International Endodontic Journal, 44, 1102-1109, 2011. Aim To evaluate the ability of two root canal sealers (Epoxy resin-based AH Plus (R) or polydimethylsiloxane-based GuttaFlow (R)) and five root filling techniques (continuous wave of condensation, Thermafil (R), lateral condensation, matched taper single gutta-percha point, laterally condensed-matched taper gutta-percha point) to kill bacteria in experimentally infected dentinal tubules. Methodology An infected dentine block model was used. One hundred and twenty extracted, single-rooted human teeth were randomly divided into 10 test (n = 10) and 2 control (n = 10) groups. The roots, except negative controls, were infected with Enterococcus faecalis for 21 days. The root canals were then filled using the test materials and methods. Positive controls were not filled. Sterile roots were used as negative controls. Dentine powder was obtained from all root canals using gates glidden drills using a standard method. The dentine powder was diluted and inoculated into bacterial growth media. Total colony-forming units (CFU) were calculated for each sample. Statistical analysis was performed using the KruskalWallis and MannWhitney U test. Results The epoxy resin-based sealer was effective in killing E.faecalis except when using Thermafil (P < 0.05), but the polydimethylsiloxane-based sealer was not effective in killing this microorganism except in the continuous wave group (P < 0.05). Conclusions In the test model, AH Plus killed bacteria in infected dentine more effectively than GuttaFlow. The filling method was less important than the sealer material.en_US
dc.description.sponsorshipSelcuk University (S. U.), Konya/TurkeySelcuk University [08102005]en_US
dc.description.sponsorshipThis study was supported by the Scientific Research Projects Coordination Center of Selcuk University (S. U.), Konya/Turkey (Project no: 08102005). The authors wish to thank Professor Said Bodur for helping with statistical analyses. They also acknowledge the support of S.U., Faculty of Dentistry, Microbiology Lab for the facilities.en_US
dc.identifier.doi10.1111/j.1365-2591.2011.01928.xen_US
dc.identifier.endpage1109en_US
dc.identifier.issn0143-2885en_US
dc.identifier.issue12en_US
dc.identifier.pmid21883295en_US
dc.identifier.scopusqualityQ1en_US
dc.identifier.startpage1102en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2591.2011.01928.x
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12395/26183
dc.identifier.volume44en_US
dc.identifier.wosWOS:000297248700004en_US
dc.identifier.wosqualityQ1en_US
dc.indekslendigikaynakWeb of Scienceen_US
dc.indekslendigikaynakScopusen_US
dc.indekslendigikaynakPubMeden_US
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.publisherWILEY-BLACKWELLen_US
dc.relation.ispartofINTERNATIONAL ENDODONTIC JOURNALen_US
dc.relation.publicationcategoryMakale - Uluslararası Hakemli Dergi - Kurum Öğretim Elemanıen_US
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/closedAccessen_US
dc.selcuk20240510_oaigen_US
dc.subjectAH Plusen_US
dc.subjectantibacterial activityen_US
dc.subjectfilling methodsen_US
dc.subjectGuttaFlowen_US
dc.titleBacterial killing by several root filling materials and methods in an ex vivo infected root canal modelen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US

Dosyalar

Koleksiyon

WoS İndeksli Yayınlar Koleksiyonu
PubMed İndeksli Yayın Koleksiyonu
Scopus İndeksli Yayınlar Koleksiyonu