Skip Navigation
Skip to contents

Restor Dent Endod : Restorative Dentistry & Endodontics

Search
Advanced Search
OPEN ACCESS
mobile search button mobile menu button

Articles

Page Path
HOME > Restor Dent Endod > Volume 34(5); 2009 > Article
Original Article EVALUATION OF ENTEROCOCCUS FAECALIS REMOVAL EFFICACY OF THE ENDOVAC® AND ENDOACTIVATOR® INTRACANAL IRRIGATION METHODS
Seung-Gon Song, Kyung-Mo Cho, Jin-Woo Kim,*
J Korean Acad Conserv Dent 2009;34(5):-396.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.5395/JKACD.2009.34.5.390
Published online: January 14, 2009

Department of Conservative Dentistry, College of Dentistry, Gangneung-Wonju National University

*Corresponding Author: Jin-Woo Kim, Department of Conservative Dentistry, College of Dentistry, Gangneung-Wonju National University, 123 Chibyon-dong, Gangneung, Gangwon-do, Korea, Tel: 82-33-640-2470 Fax: 82-33-642-6410, E-mail: mendo7@kangnung.ac.kr
• Received: June 17, 2009   • Revised: July 20, 2009   • Accepted: September 4, 2009

Copyright © 2009 The Korean Academy of Conservative Dentistry

This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

  • 609 Views
  • 7 Download
prev next
Full Article

Download PDF Download PDF

  • The aim of this study was to evaluate endodontic irrigation methods with EndoVac® and EndoActivator® in the elimination of Enterococcus faecalis from the root canals. Extracted 70 human single-rooted teeth were used. The canals were instrumented by a crown-down technique with .04 taper ProFile to ISO size 40. After the teeth were autoclaved, the canals were inoculated with E. faecalis and incubated for 48 h. The teeth were randomly divided into three experimental groups of 20 teeth each according to canal irrigation methods and two control groups as follows: group 1 - EndoVac®; group 2 - EndoActivator®; group 3 - Conventional needle irrigation method. After canal irrigation using 2.5% NaOCl, first samples (S1) were taken using sterile paper point. And the canals were filled with sterile brain heart infusion (BHI) broth and incubated for 24 h, then second samples (S2) were taken. The samples were cultured on BHI agar plate to determine the numbers of colony forming units (CFU). In first sampling (S1), only one canal of conventional method among the all experimental groups was positive cultured. In second sampling (S2), EndoVac® group showed the least positive culture numbers of E. faecalis. There was statistically significant difference between the EndoVac® and conventional needle irrigation methods in the mean value of Log CFU. According to the results of this study, EndoVac® showed better efficacy than conventional needle irrigation method in the elimination of E. faecalis from the root canal.
  • Keywords: EndoVac; EndoActivator; Irrigation; Negative pressure; Apical negative pressure; E. faecalis
Table 1.
Numbers of Positive cultures
Irrigation method N Positive Culture
(S1) (S2)
EndoVac� 20 0 (0%) 3 (15%)
EndoActivator� 20 0 (0%) 8 (40%)
Conventional� 20 1 (5%) 13 (65%)

Positive control group (n=5)

Negative control group (n=5)

Table 2.
Mean values of the quantity of bacterial cells in secondary sampling (S2)
Irrigation method Colony Forming Units /ml (S2)
  Mean (CFU/ml) Mean of LOG
EndoVac� 0.99×105 0.87 *
EndoActivator� 2.06×105 1.81
Conventional 4.12×105 2.90

*There was significant(p < .05) difference between EndoVac� and conventional irrigation method groups

  • 1. Kakehashi S, Stanley HR, Fitzgerald RJ. The effects of surgical exposure of dental pulps in germ-free and conventional laboratory rats. Oral Surg, Oral Med, Oral Pathol 20:340-348. 1965.PubMed
  • 2. Sjogren U, Figdor D, Spangberg L, Sundqvist G. The antimicrobial effect of calcium hydroxide as a short-term intracanal dressing. Int Endod J 24:119-125. 1991.ArticlePubMed
  • 3. Bystrom A, Sundqvist G. Bacteriologic evaluation of the efficacy of mechanical root canal instrumentation in endodontic therapy. Scand J Dent Res 89:321-328. 1981.ArticlePubMed
  • 4. Wu MK, van der Sluis LW, Wesselink PR. The capability of two hand instrumentation techniques to remove the inner layer of dentine in oval canals. Int Endod J 36:218-224. 2003.ArticlePubMedPDF
  • 5. Chow TW. Mechanical effectiveness of root canal irrigation. J Endod 9:475-479. 1983.ArticlePubMed
  • 6. Salzgeber RM, Brilliant JD. An in vivo evaluation of the penetration of an irrigating solution in root canals. J Endod 3:394-398. 1977.ArticlePubMed
  • 7. Wu MK, Wesselink PR. Efficacy of three techniques in cleaning the apical portion of curved root canals. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 79:492-496. 1995.ArticlePubMed
  • 8. Heard F, Walton RE. Scanning electron microscope study comparing four root canal preparation techniques in small curved canals. Int Endod J 30:323-331. 1997.ArticlePubMed
  • 9. Gutarts R, Nusstein J, Reader A, Beck M. In vivo debridement efficacy of ultrasonic irrigation following hand rotary instrumentation in human mandibular molars. J Endod 31:166-170. 2005.ArticlePubMed
  • 10. McGill S, Gulabivala K, Mordan N, Ng YL. The efficacy of dynamic irrigation using a commercially available system (RinsEndo�) determined by removal of a colla-gen‘bio-molecular film’from an ex vivo model. Int Endod J 41:602-608. 2008.ArticlePubMed
  • 11. Hauser V, Braun A, Frentzen M. Penetration depth of a dye marker into dentine using a novel hydrodynamic system (RinsEndo�). Int Endod J 40:644-652. 2007.ArticlePubMed
  • 12. Siqueira JF Jr, Machado AG, Silveira RM, Lopes HP, de Uzeda M. Evaluation of the effectiveness of sodium hypochlorite used with three irrigation methods in the elimination of Enterococcus faecalis from the root canal, in vitro. Int Endod J 30:279-282. 1997.ArticlePubMed
  • 13. Clegg MS, Vertucci FJ, Walker C, Belanger M, Britto LR. The effect of exposure to irrigant solutions on apical dentin biofilms in vitro. J Endod 32:434-437. 2006.ArticlePubMed
  • 14. Dunavant TR, Regan JD, Glickman GN, Solomon ES, Honeyman AL. Comparative evaluation of endodontic irrigants against Enterococcus faecalis biofilms. J Endod 32:527-531. 2006.ArticlePubMed
  • 15. Pashley EL, Birdsong NL, Bowman K, Pashley DH. Cytotoxic effects of NaOCl on vital tissue. J Endod 11:525-528. 1985.ArticlePubMed
  • 16. Gatot A, Arbelle J, Leiberman A, Yanai-Inbar I. Effects of sodium hypochlorite on soft tissues after its inadvertent injection beyond the root apex. J Endod 17:573-574. 1991.ArticlePubMed
  • 17. Gernhardt CR, Eppendorf K, Kozlowski A, Brandt M. Toxicity of concentrated sodium hypochlorite used as an endodontic irrigant. Int Endod J 37:272-280. 2004.ArticlePubMed
  • 18. Schoeffel GJ. The EndoVac method of endodontic irrigation, Part 2- Efficacy. Dent Today 26:82-87. 2008.
  • 19. Fukumoto Y, Kikuchi I, Yoshioka T, Kobayashi C, Suda H. An ex vivo evaluation of a new root canal irrigation technique with intracanal aspiration. Int Endod J 39:93-99. 2006.ArticlePubMed
  • 20. Bystrom A, Claesson R, Sundqvist G. The antibacterial effect of camphorated paramonochlorophenol, camphorated phenol and calcium hydroxide in the treatment of infected root canals. Endod Dent Traumatol 1:170-175. 1985.ArticlePubMed
  • 21. Fidgor D, Davies JK, Sundqvist G. Starvation survival, growth and recovery of Enterococcus faecalis in human serum. Oral Microbiol Immunol 18:234-239. 2003.ArticlePubMedPDF
  • 22. Jee SW, Kim ES, Jung IY, Yoo YJ. The effect of canal filling with gutta-percha or Resilon on Enterococcus faecalis in bovine dentinal tubules. Journal of Korean Academy of Conservative Dentistry 30:385-392. 2005.Article
  • 23. Kim HJ, Park SH, Cho KM, Kim JW. Evaluation of time-dependent antimicrobial effect of sodium dichloroisocyanurate (NaDCC) on Enterococcus faecalis in the root canal. Journal of Korean Academy of Conservative Dentistry 32:121-128. 2007.Article
  • 24. Albrecht LJ, Baumgartner JC, Marshall JG. Evaluation of apical debris removal using various sizes and tapers of ProFile GT files. J Endod 30:425-428. 2004.ArticlePubMed
  • 25. Abou-Rass M, Piccinino MV. The effectiveness of four clinical irrigation methods on the removal of root canal debris. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 54:323-328. 1982.Article
  • 26. Siqueira JF Jr, Arau、jo MCP, Garcia PF, Fraga RC, Dantas CJS. Histological evaluation of the effectiveness of five instrumentation techniques for cleaning the apical third of root canals. J Endod 23:499-502. 1997.ArticlePubMed
  • 27. Usman AN, Baumgartner JC, Marshall JG. Influence of instrument size on root canal debridement. J Endod 30:110-112. 2004.ArticlePubMed
  • 28. Schoeffel J, Sbeih W, Wallace J. Efficacy of a new endodontic irrigation method using negative pressure. Abstract 1593. Presented at IADR 83rd General Session. Baltimore, MD: March. p. 9-12. 2005.
  • 29. Ram Z. Effectiveness of root canal irrigation. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol 44:306-312. 1977.ArticlePubMed
  • 30. Hwang HK, Bae SC, Cho YL. The irrigating effect before and after coronal flaring. Journal of Korean Academy of Conservative Dentistry 28:72-79. 2003.Article
  • 31. Nielsen BA, Baumgartner JC. Comparison of the EndoVac system to needle irrigation of root canals. J Endod 33:611-615. 2007.ArticlePubMed
  • 32. Ruddle CJ. Hydrodynamic disinfection: Tsunami Endodontics. Dent Today 26:110. 112. 114-117. 2007.
  • 33. Pitt WG. Removal of oral biofilm by sonic phenomena. Am J Dent 18:345-352. 2005.PubMed
  • 34. van der Sluis LWM, Wu MK, Wesselink PR. The evaluation of removal of calcium hydroxide paste from an artificial standardized groove in the apical root canal using different irrigation methodologies. Int Endod J 40:52-57. 2007.ArticlePubMed
  • 35. Kuruvilla JR, Kamath MP. Antimicrobial activity of 2.5% NaOCl and 0.2% CHX gluconate separately and combined, as endodontic irrigants. J Endod 24:472-476. 1998.PubMed

Tables & Figures

REFERENCES

    Citations

    Citations to this article as recorded by  

      • ePub LinkePub Link
      • Cite
        CITE
        export Copy Download
        Close
        Download Citation
        Download a citation file in RIS format that can be imported by all major citation management software, including EndNote, ProCite, RefWorks, and Reference Manager.
        Format:
        • RIS — For EndNote, ProCite, RefWorks, and most other reference management software
        • BibTeX — For JabRef, BibDesk, and other BibTeX-specific software
        Include:
        • Citation for the content below
        EVALUATION OF ENTEROCOCCUS FAECALIS REMOVAL EFFICACY OF THE ENDOVAC® AND ENDOACTIVATOR® INTRACANAL IRRIGATION METHODS
        J Korean Acad Conserv Dent. 2009;34(5):390-396.   Published online January 14, 2009
        DOI: https://doi.org/10.5395/JKACD.2009.34.5.390
        Close
      • XML DownloadXML Download
      EVALUATION OF ENTEROCOCCUS FAECALIS REMOVAL EFFICACY OF THE ENDOVAC® AND ENDOACTIVATOR® INTRACANAL IRRIGATION METHODS
      EVALUATION OF ENTEROCOCCUS FAECALIS REMOVAL EFFICACY OF THE ENDOVAC® AND ENDOACTIVATOR® INTRACANAL IRRIGATION METHODS
      Irrigation method N Positive Culture
      (S1) (S2)
      EndoVac� 20 0 (0%) 3 (15%)
      EndoActivator� 20 0 (0%) 8 (40%)
      Conventional� 20 1 (5%) 13 (65%)
      Irrigation method Colony Forming Units /ml (S2)
        Mean (CFU/ml) Mean of LOG
      EndoVac� 0.99×105 0.87 *
      EndoActivator� 2.06×105 1.81
      Conventional 4.12×105 2.90
      Table 1. Numbers of Positive cultures

      Positive control group (n=5)

      Negative control group (n=5)

      Table 2. Mean values of the quantity of bacterial cells in secondary sampling (S2)

      There was significant(p < .05) difference between EndoVac� and conventional irrigation method groups

      Table 1.

      Table 2.

      Restor Dent Endod : Restorative Dentistry & Endodontics
      © The Korean Academy of Conservative Dentistry.
      Close layer
      TOP