title: Antibacterial activity of Propolis versus conventional endodontic disinfectants against Enterococcus faecalis in infected dentinal tubules.
abstract: BACKGROUND
  The antibacterial activity against Enterococcus faecalis of 2 propolis samples was investigated in a dentin block model, and their effectiveness was compared with that of established endodontic disinfectants, chlorhexidine (CHX) and calcium hydroxide [Ca(OH)(2)].
  
  
  METHODS
  Standardized dentin blocks were infected with E. faecalis ATCC 29212. The root canal space was filled with one of the ethanolic extracts of propolis (Artvin or Tekirdağ mix [TM]), CHX 2%, Ca(OH)(2), or ethanol or phosphate-buffered saline for control. Canal dentin was sampled after 1 or 7 days by using a standard-size bur. The dentinal shavings were vortexed vigorously in phosphate-buffered saline, and aliquots were cultured on tryptone soy agar plates. Colonies were counted after 2 days of incubation. Statistical significance was set to 5%.
  
  
  RESULTS
  All experimental agents significantly reduced the number of the cultivable bacteria. CHX was the most potent disinfectant at both times. Compared with the ethanol control, no significant reduction in the number of colonies was found for the propolis extracts at day 1; however, significant reduction was found at day 7. The 2 propolis samples were statistically similar to each other and to Ca(OH)(2), but the TM sample was also similar to CHX at day 7. This has been linked to the greater concentration of flavonoids, a group of antibacterially active compounds, in the TM sample as determined by gas chromatography-mass spectrometry analysis.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  The antimicrobial activity of the propolis samples tested in this study was between Ca(OH)(2) and CHX. Both propolis samples were antimicrobially effective; however, their activity did not exceed CHX.
authors.affiliation: Department of Restorative Dentistry and Endodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Gazi University, Ankara, Turkey. guvenk@gazi.edu.tr
authors.forename: Guven
authors.initials: G
authors.lastname: Kayaoglu
authors.forename: Hüma
authors.initials: H
authors.lastname: Ömürlü
authors.forename: Gülçin
authors.initials: G
authors.lastname: Akca
authors.forename: Mügem
authors.initials: M
authors.lastname: Gürel
authors.forename: Ömür
authors.initials: Ö
authors.lastname: Gençay
authors.forename: Kadriye
authors.initials: K
authors.lastname: Sorkun
authors.forename: Bekir
authors.initials: B
authors.lastname: Salih
mesh_terms: D000891:Anti-Infective Agents, Local / Q000494:pharmacology*; D058491:Bacterial Load; D002126:Calcium Hydroxide / Q000494:pharmacology; D002710:Chlorhexidine / Q000494:pharmacology; D003786:Dental Pulp Cavity / Q000382:microbiology* / Q000648:ultrastructure; D003804:Dentin / Q000382:microbiology* / Q000648:ultrastructure; D013293:Enterococcus faecalis / Q000187:drug effects*; D000431:Ethanol / Q000494:pharmacology; D005419:Flavonoids / Q000032:analysis; D008401:Gas Chromatography-Mass Spectrometry; D006801:Humans; D008422:Materials Testing; D008855:Microscopy, Electron, Scanning; D011429:Propolis / Q000032:analysis / Q000494:pharmacology*; D012388:Root Canal Irrigants / Q000494:pharmacology*; D016369:Smear Layer; D012965:Sodium Chloride; D012997:Solvents / Q000494:pharmacology; D013696:Temperature; D013997:Time Factors
chemical_list: D000891:Anti-Infective Agents, Local; D005419:Flavonoids; D012388:Root Canal Irrigants; D012997:Solvents; D000431:Ethanol; D012965:Sodium Chloride; D011429:Propolis; D002126:Calcium Hydroxide; D002710:Chlorhexidine