4.3 Article

Influence of surfactants addition on the properties of calcium hypochlorite solutions

期刊

JOURNAL OF APPLIED ORAL SCIENCE
卷 27, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

UNIV SAO PAULO FAC ODONTOLOGIA BAURU
DOI: 10.1590/1678-7757-2018-0157

关键词

Calcium hypochlorite; Endodontics; Root canal irrigants; Sodium hypochlorite; Surface tension

资金

  1. Coordination for the Improvment of Higher Edication Personel - CAPES

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objectives: The aim of this study was to evaluate the influence of surfactants 0.2% or 0.1% cetrimide (Cet) or 0.008% benzalkonium chloride (BAK) on 2.5% calcium hypochlorite (Ca(OCl)(2)), and compare to sodium hypochlorite (NaOCl), regarding the properties of pH, free chlorine content, surface tension, contact angle, pulp dissolution and antimicrobial activity. Material and Methods: The pH and free chlorine content were evaluated by digital pHmeter and by titration, respectively. Surface tension was measured by the platinum ring technique with a Du Nouy tensiometer. The solution's contact angle in human dentin surfaces was checked by Drop Shape Analyzer software. Bovine pulps were used for pulp dissolution analysis and the dissolving capacity was expressed by percent weight loss. Antimicrobial activity over Enterococcus faecalis was evaluated by the agar diffusion method. Results: Surfactants addition to Ca(OCl)(2) and NaOCl did not alter the pH, free chlorine content and pulp dissolution properties. Ca(OCl)(2) had the highest surface tension among all tested solutions. When surfactants were added to Ca(OCl)(2) and NaOCl, there was a significant reduction of surface tension and contact angle values. The addition of 0.2% or 0.1% Cet enhanced antimicrobial activity of both Ca(OCl)(2) and NaOCl. Conclusion: Surfactant addition to 2.5% Ca(OCl)(2) has shown acceptable outcomes for pH, free chlorine content, surface tension, contact angle, pulp dissolution and antimicrobial activity. Furthermore, the addition of 0.2% Cet showed better results for all tested properties.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据