4.5 Article

Dentinal tubule disinfection with 2% chlorhexidine gel, propolis, morinda citrifolia juice, 2% povidone iodine, and calcium hydroxide

Journal

INTERNATIONAL ENDODONTIC JOURNAL
Volume 43, Issue 5, Pages 419-423

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2591.2010.01696.x

Keywords

calcium hydroxide; chlorhexidine gel; E; faecalis; morinda citrifolia juice; povidone iodine; propolis

Ask authors/readers for more resources

P>Aim To investigate the antimicrobial activity of 2% chlorhexidine gel, propolis, Morinda citrifolia juice (MCJ), 2% povidone Iodine (POV-I), and calcium hydroxide on Enterococcus faecalis-infected root canal dentine at two different depths (200 mu m and 400 mu m) and three time intervals (day 1, 3 & 5). Methodology One hundred and eighty extracted human teeth were infected for 21 days with E. faecalis. Samples were divided into six groups. Group I (Saline) (Negative control), Group II (Propolis), Group III (MCJ), Group IV (2% Povidone Iodine), Group V (2% Chlorhexidine Gel), Group VI (Calcium hydroxide). At the end of 1, 3, and 5 days, the remaining vital bacterial population was assessed. Dentine shavings were collected at two depths (200 mu m and 400 mu m), and total numbers of colony forming units were determined. The values were analysed statistically with one-way analysis of variance followed by Tukey multiple comparison test. The paired t-test was used to check for differences in growth at different time intervals within groups and for differences at the two depths (P < 0.01) Results The number of colony-forming units was statistically significant in all groups compared to the control group (Saline). Group V (chlorhexidine gluconate) (100%) produced better antimicrobial efficacy followed by 2% POV-I (87%), propolis (71%), MCJ (69%), and calcium hydroxide (55%). There was no significant difference between propolis and MCJ and no significant difference between data at 200 mu m and 400 mu m. Conclusion Propolis and MCJ were effective against E. faecalis in dentine of extracted teeth.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available