Group 1, 2 and 3 (p<0.05). Based on the Median Control test, the value of 8% East Java propolis extracts was 1,000, which was the best value compared to 2.5% NaOCl, 5% NaOCl and aquadest. Conclusion: It can be concluded that 8% East Java propolis extract is the most effective solution for cleaning root canal walls compared with 2.5% NaOCl and 5% NaOCl.
Background: Root canal irrigation is an important stage in root canal treatment as it is requires to eliminate necrotic and debris tissue as well as root canal wetting. Unfortunately, root canal irrigation can cause the material utilised to pass into the apical foramen leading to periapical complications. Consequently, the irrigation solution should have low toxicity. Sodium hypochlorite (NaOCl) is a commonly used irrigation solution since it has antibacterial properties. Moreover, NaOCl is also known to have the ability to dissolve necrotic tissue, vital pulp tissue and organic components of dentin and biofilms. Nevertheless, it can still cause damage when coming into contact with periapical tissues. On the other hand, Mangosteen peel extract (Garcinia mangostana L.), also has antibacterial activities. Hence, Mangosteen peel extract is assumed to be employable as an alternative irrigation solution. Purpose: This research aimed to reveal the toxicity levels of NaOCl and Mangosteen peel extract (Garcinia mangostin L.) used as irrigation solution in human periodontal ligament fibroblast cells (HPdLFc). Methods: HPdLFc were obtained from periapical tissues taken from one third of the first premolar teeth cultured. These cells were subsequently divided into several groups exposed to NaOCl and Mangosteen peel extract at certain concentrations. A toxicity test was then conducted using MTT assay. The results were analyzed with an Elisa reader. Cell deaths and LC50 were then calculated. Results: NaOCl became toxic at a concentration of 0.254 µl/ml or 0.025%, while Mangosteen peel extract became so at one of 2.099 ug/ml or 0.209%. Conclusion: NaOCl can be toxic at a concentration of 0.254 µl/ml or 0.025% and Mangosteen peel extract at one of 2.099 μg/ml or 0.209%.
Background:The presence of Enterococcus faecalis in root canal is considered as one of the factors causing root canal treatment failure since the bacteria are capable of producing glucosyltransferase enzymes that play a role in forming endodontic biofilms. Hence, the bacteria are resistant to antibiotics. On the other hand, cocoa pod husk extract which is rich in chemical components especially flavonoids, tannins, and saponins, is thought to have an ability to inhibit Enterococcus faecalis glucosyltransferase enzyme activity. Aim: The aim of this research is to analyze the inhibitory ability of cocoa pod husk extract against E. faecalis glucosyltransferase enzyme activity. Materials and methods: A total of 27 research samples were divided into three groups, namely, positive control (chlorhexidine gluconate 2%), negative control (aquades), and cocoa pod husk extract 3.12%. Next the enzymatic activity of each sample group was calculated based on the size of the fructose area read by high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) expressed in percent (%) and then converted to μmol/mL fructose which was considered as 1 unit of glucosyltransferase enzyme activity. Subsequently, the data were analyzed statistically using Kruskal-Wallis test. Results: The results of data analysis using the Kruskal-Wallis test showed significant differences between groups of samples (p <0.05). Conclusion:Cocoa pod husk extract of 3.12% has inhibitory effect on E. faecalis glucosyltransferase enzyme activity. Clinical significance: The use of cocoa pod husk extract meets the requirements and is proven useful as an irrigation agent in the treatment of root canals, because it contains antibacterial properties against E. faecalis.
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.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.