Disinfection of gutta-percha cones with chlorhexidine

Abstract

This study investigated the effectiveness of detergent and aqueous solutions of 2% chlorhexidine digluconate in decontaminating gutta-percha cones (gpc) contaminated with bacteria, yeast, or bacterial spores. Guttapercha cones were contaminated with 10 7 -10 8 colony-forming units per milliliter (cfu/ml) of the following test organisms: Staphylococcus aureus, Enterococcus faecalis, Escherichia coli, or Candida albicans. Spores of Bacillus subtilis were also tested. Contaminated gpc were treated with the chlorhexidine solutions for 1, 5, 10, or 15 min. Each cone was then transferred to a tube containing saline and the micoorganisms were recovered after homogenization for cfu determination. Both detergent and aqueous chlorhexidine solutions were effective in eliminating S. aureus, E. faecalis, and C. albicans cells adhered on the surface of gpc within 1 min of exposure. E. coli was eliminated in 5 min with detergent solution. The Bacillus subtilis spores were eliminated by chlorhexidine solutions within 5 min. The results of this study demonstrated that both aqueous and detergent solutions of 2% chlorhexidine digluconate were effective in decontaminating gpc within 5 minutes of exposure.

Effectiveness of 2% peracetic acid for the disinfection of gutta-percha cones

“…In fact, both aqueous and detergent solutions of 2% chlorhexidine were reported to be effective in decontaminating gutta-percha cones contaminated by Staphylococcus aureus, Enterococcus faecalis, Escherichia coli, Candida albicans and spores of Bacillus subtilis after 5 minutes of exposure. 3 Cardoso et al 10 also reported that gutta-percha cone decontamination may be achieved with 2% chlorhexidine after 1 minute. On the other hand, Gomes et al 8 showed that 0.2%, 1%, and 2% chlorhexidine, in either liquid or gel form, were not effective for the high disinfection requirements of gutta-percha cones contaminated with spores of B. subtilis, even after 72 hours of contact.…”

“…1,2,3,4,5,6 In clinical practice, the dentist is occasionally faced with the problem of re-infection after endodontic treatment. Moreover, penetration of bacteria into the blood stream of systemically compromised patients should be prevented because of the risk of infective endocarditis.…”

“…2 Therefore, much care must be taken during this procedure to prevent contamination of filling materials. 3,7 Gutta-percha cones are the most commonly used material for filling the root canal. They are biocompatible, dimensionally stable, radiopaque, thermoplastic and easily removed from the root canal.…”

“…Even though gutta-percha cones are produced under aseptic conditions and have potentially antimicrobial properties, especially owing to their zinc oxide component, they can be contaminated by handling and also by aerosols and physical sources during the storage process. 2,3,8,9 Therefore, the handling of gutta-percha cones must follow the basic principles of infection control. In addition, gutta-percha cones that have been in contact with patients should be discarded.…”

“…1 Owing to the thermoplastic characteristic of gutta-percha cones, they may not be sterilized by the conventional process in which moist or dry heat is used, because this may cause alteration to the gutta-percha structure. 2,3,4,6,8,10 For this reason, previous studies suggested that several different chemical agents could be used for the rapid decontamination of gutta-percha cones in dentistry.…”