Objective To determine the microbiological effect of photoactivated disinfection (PAD) as an adjunct to normal root canal disinfection in vivo. Design A randomised trial carried out in general dental practice. Subjects and methods Patients presenting with symptoms of irreversible pulpitis or periradicular periodontitis requiring endodontic therapy were selected at random. A microbiological sample of the canal was taken on accessing the canal, after conventional endodontic therapy, and finally after the PAD process (photosensitiser and light) had been carried out on the prepared canal. All three samples from each canal were plated within 30 minutes of sampling and cultured anaerobically for five days. Growth of viable bacteria was recorded for each sample to determine bacterial load. Results Thirty of the 32 canals were included in the results. Cultures from the remaining two did not reach the laboratory within the target time during which viability was sustained. Of the remaining 30, 10 canals were negative to culture. These were either one of the canals in multi rooted teeth where the others were infected or where a pre-treatment with a poly-antibiotic paste had been applied to hyperaemic vital tissue. Sixteen of the remainder were negative to culture after conventional endodontic therapy. Three of the four which had remained infected cultured negative after the PAD process. In the one canal where culturable bacteria were still present, a review of the light delivery system showed a fracture in the fibre reducing the effective light output by 90%. Conclusions The PAD system offers a means of destroying bacteria remaining after using conventional irrigants in endodontic therapy.

Objective To compare the effect of a combination of 20% citric acid solution and photo-activated disinfection with the use of 20% citric acid and 2.25% sodium hypochlorite solutions on bacterial load on the dentine walls in prepared canals in vivo. Subjects and methods Sixty-four randomly selected cases were evaluated and allocated to one of two groups. In Group 1, after gaining access to the root canal, bacterial load on the canal walls was sampled using endodontic files. A further sample was taken after apex location and initial widening of the canal had been completed and the photoactivated disinfection process carried out. A final sample was taken after completion of the canal preparation using citric acid and sodium hypochlorite solutions. In Group 2, the initial sample was taken as described previously. A second sample was taken after conventional preparation using 20% citric acid and sodium hypochlorite solutions as co-irrigants. A final sample was then taken after a subsequent PAD treatment. All samples were cultured for facultative anaerobic bacteria. Results Of the canals treated in Group 1 only two of the 23 canals infected showed culturable bacteria after the use of citric acid and photo-activated disinfection. Of these two canals, one was free of culturable bacteria on completion of conventional treatment but the other still contained culturable bacteria. In Group 2, four canals of the 23 infected initially, remained contaminated after conventional treatment. After subsequent photo-activated disinfection three of these four canals were free of culturable bacteria. Conclusion Results indicate that the use of a chelating agent acting as a cleaner and disrupter of the biofilm and photo-activated disinfection to kill bacteria is an effective alternative to the use of hypochlorite as a root canal cleaning system.

No abstract

No abstract