Evaluation of antimicrobial efficacy of root canal sealers against Enterococcus faecalis: A comparative study

6Citations
Citations of this article
36Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Aim: The study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of root canal sealer's antimicrobial activity against Enterococcus faecalis. Materials and methods: Root canal sealers with the brands Endoflas FS, AH Plus, and Tubli-Seal EWT were selected. Enterococcus faecalis organisms' zone of inhibition was measured. Tukey post hoc tests and one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) were used to compare the data among study groups and within its group. The data were said to be statistically significant with an established p-value less than 0.05. Results: The maximum zone of inhibition (23.20 ± 1.202 mm) was shown by Endoflas FS sealer; AH Plus and Tubli-Seal showed the inhibition zone of (18.42 ± 1.023) and (16.88 ± 0.962) respectively, following Endoflas FS. The ANOVA test showed p < 0.0001, which is highly statistically significant. AH Plus and Endoflas FS showed a statistically significant difference of 0.04 and 0.001 in between groups, and there was no statistically significant difference in the Tubli-Seal group from Tukey post hoc test. Conclusion: The study showed that Endoflas FS sealer has a significant antimicrobial effect against E. faecalis. Clinical significance: In clinical situation, despite perfect chemomechanical root canal preparation, persistence of microorganisms may reinfect the root canal. Therefore, endodontic root canal sealers play a major role in the eradication of bacteria. The polymicrobial nature of endodontic infection plays a main role during the usage of endodontic sealer with antimicrobial agents, which in turn reduces the failure of endodontic treatment.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Arora, S., Mir, S., Gautam, A., Batra, R., Soni, S., & Lata, K. (2018). Evaluation of antimicrobial efficacy of root canal sealers against Enterococcus faecalis: A comparative study. Journal of Contemporary Dental Practice, 19(6), 680–683. https://doi.org/10.5005/jp-journals-10024-2319

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free