Department of Conservative Dentistry, College of Dentistry, Gangneung-Wonju National University
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.
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 |
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 |
Positive control group (n=5) Negative control group (n=5)
There was significant(p < .05) difference between EndoVac� and conventional irrigation method groups