Eradication of Intracanal Enterococcus Faecalis Biofilm by Passive Ultrasonic Irrigation and RinsEndo System.
OBJECTIVE
The aim of the study was to compare the antimicrobial efficacy of three irrigation techniques after the use of standardized volume of NaOCl and with standardized time and irrigation.


METHODS
Forty-eight single rooted teeth were inoculated with an Enterococcus faecalis suspension for 24 h. The remaining six canals served as negative controls. The 36 root canals were randomly distributed into three experimental groups; group 1, conventional syringe irrigation; group 2, automated-dynamic irrigation (RinsEndo); group 3, passive ultrasonic irrigation (PUI). In the first protocol, the standardized volume of 3% NaOCl (20 mL) was used and in the second protocol, and standardized irrigation time (45 seconds) was used. Samples from root canals were cultured and the colony-forming units (CFUs) were counted.


RESULTS
When the volume of the irrigant was standardized, RinsEndo was more effective than PUI (p<0.01). When the irrigation time was standardized, there were no significant differences between any irrigation techniques (p>0.05). The RinsEndo group had the highest percentage of minimal counts of E. faecalis CFUs.


CONCLUSIONS
RinsEndo was more effective than PUI only when the volume of the irrigant was standardized. However, the RinsEndo provided higher bacterial reduction in both protocols when using the least amount of the irrigant and providing longer contact time.
Private Dental Polyclinic, Zagreb, Croatia.
Ivana
I
Toljan
Private Dental Polyclinic, Zagreb, Croatia.
Ivona
I
Bago
Department of Endodontics and Restorative Dentistry, School of Dental Medicine, University of Zagreb, Croatia.
Jurič
Department of Endodontics and Restorative Dentistry, School of Dental Medicine, University of Zagreb, Croatia.
Ivica
I
Anić
Aluminium Compounds; Calcium Compounds; Root Canal Filling Materials; Toxicity Tests
Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2005 Jun;99(6):768-72
15897866
Int Endod J. 2008 Jul;41(7):602-8
18479371
J Endod. 2013 Sep;39(9):1171-5
23953293
Int Endod J. 1982 Oct;15(4):187-96
6964523
J Endod. 2010 Apr;36(4):703-7
20307747
J Endod. 2006 May;32(5):389-98
16631834
J Endod. 2010 Dec;36(12):1983-7
21092817
J Endod. 2010 Aug;36(8):1358-60
20647096
J Endod. 2009 Oct;35(10):1422-7
19801244
J Endod. 1983 Nov;9(11):475-9
6586975
Int Endod J. 1989 Jul;22(4):174-8
2637222
Int Endod J. 2010 Jul;43(7):581-9
20636517
Int Endod J. 2007 Jan;40(1):11-7
17209827
Clin Oral Investig. 2016 Sep;20(7):1541-6
26531193
J Endod. 2009 Jun;35(6):791-804
19482174
Int Endod J. 2002 May;35(5):437-46
12059915
J Endod. 1980 Sep;6(9):740-3
6935384
Int Endod J. 2003 Sep;36(9):591-8
12950572
Int Endod J. 2012 Sep;45(9):865-70
22486805
J Endod. 2000 Dec;26(12):739-43
11471645
J Am Dent Assoc. 1996 Sep;127(9):1333-41
8854609
Int Endod J. 2014 Jul;47(7):659-66
24117881
Int Endod J. 2009 Apr;42(4):277-87
19220511
Int Endod J. 2007 Aug;40(8):644-52
17532774
J Endod. 2011 Jul;37(7):1008-12
21689561
J Endod. 2007 Jun;33(6):667-72
17509403
J Endod. 2014 Oct;40(10):1622-6
25260734
Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 2005 May;26(5):486-9
15954488
J Endod. 2004 Aug;30(8):559-67
15273636