Comparison of the ability of newly designed rotary files to eliminate viable Enterococcus faecalis populations from long oval root canals of extracted human teeth to that of the self-adjusting file (SAF). One hundred caries-free, single-rooted, long oval teeth were contaminated with E. faecalis. The teeth were randomly distributed into four groups (n = 25) as follows: G.1, manual; G.2, SAF; G.3, ProTaper Next; and G.4, BT-Race. Two microbial samples were obtained from each tooth with sterile paper points, (s1) before and (s2) after instrumentation. The relative reduction in colony-forming units (CFUs) from s1 to s2 measurements was calculated and compared among the groups using parametric Kruskal-Wallis one-way anova on ranks and Dunn's method (a = 0.05). The results indicated a descending order of the groups with regard to efficacy as follows: BT-Race, Next, SAF and manual. The statistical analysis showed that the relative percentage reduction (RR) of CFUs was lower in the manual group than in the other groups, while the SAF group showed a significantly lower RR than the BT-Race group (P < 0.05). The efficacy in reduction of the microbiological load of viable E. faecalis from long oval root canals was different between the tested endodontic systems.
BackgroundNon carious cervical lesions associated to muscle hyperfunctions are increasing. Microhybrid resin composites are used to restore cervical abfractions. The purpose of this study was to investigate if resin composites modify tooth plaque, inducing an increment of cariogenic microflora and evaluate their effect, in vivo and in vitro, against S. mutans.Material and MethodsEight abfractions were restored with two microhybrid resin composites (Venus, Heraeus-Kulzer® and Esthet-X, Dentsply®), after gnatological therapy, in three patients with muscle hyperfunctions. For each abfraction three samples of plaque were taken from the cervical perimeter: before the restoration, one week and three months after restoration. The samples were evaluated both by traditional microbiological methods and by Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR). In vitro, disk-shaped specimens of the two composites were prepared to estimate the effects against pre-cultured S. mutans, after incubation at 37°C for 24h and assessed by a turbidimetric technique.ResultsIn vivo no differences were found in plaque growth, for all samples, before and after restoration with both composites; in vitro, instead, a significant reduction of S. mutans growth was found between specimens of two composites (Mann-Whitney U-test p>0,06).ConclusionsIn this study a relevant consideration was elicited: composite materials, in vivo, do not modify plaque composition of non carious cervical lesions to a potential cariogenic plaque.
Key words:Abfraction, restoration, S. mutans, composite, class V.
A comparison of the abilities of rotary versus reciprocating files to eliminate viable Enterococcus faecalis populations from the long oval root canals of extracted human teeth. Fifty teeth were contaminated and randomly distributed into two groups (n = 25 each): BT-RaCe group and WaveOne group. Two microbial samples were obtained from each tooth before (S1) and after (S2) instrumentation. The CFUs from the S1 and S2 measurements were calculated and compared between the groups. Both groups showed significantly fewer CFUs in the S2 samples (P < 0.001). In the S2 intragroup comparison, BT-RaCe resulted in significantly fewer CFUs than WaveOne (P = 0.010). In the direct comparison between the rotary multiple file shaping system and the reciprocating single-file system, the multiple file system was more efficient at reducing the microbiological load of viable E. faecalis from long oval root canals.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.