International Journal of Clinical Pediatric Dentistry

Register      Login

VOLUME 14 , ISSUE 3 ( May-June, 2021 ) > List of Articles

RESEARCH ARTICLE

Evaluation of the Antibacterial Activity of Triclosan-incorporated Root Canal Filling Materials for Primary Teeth against Enterococcus faecalis

Deepak B Mata, Attiguppe Ramasetty Prabhakar, Yarmunja Mahabala Karuna, Suryan Sugandhan, Nisma Zahoor, Amitha Mahendrapa Shagale

Keywords : Antimicrobial activity, Endoflas FS, Enterococcus fecalis, Triclosan, Zinc oxide eugenol

Citation Information : Mata DB, Prabhakar AR, Karuna YM, Sugandhan S, Zahoor N, Shagale AM. Evaluation of the Antibacterial Activity of Triclosan-incorporated Root Canal Filling Materials for Primary Teeth against Enterococcus faecalis. Int J Clin Pediatr Dent 2021; 14 (3):393-397.

DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10005-1960

License: CC BY-NC 4.0

Published Online: 29-09-2021

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2021; Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) Ltd.


Abstract

Aim and objective: To compare the antibacterial activity of root canal filling materials namely zinc oxide eugenol and Endoflas FS with or without the incorporation of Triclosan. Materials and methods: The study consisted of four groups, with 15 samples in each group: group I (zinc oxide eugenol paste), group Ia (zinc oxide eugenol paste + 2.5% Triclosan), group II (Endoflas FS), and group IIa (Endoflas FS + 2.5% Triclosan). A double layer agar well diffusion test was used to evaluate the antibacterial activity against Enterococcus faecalis. The zones of microbial inhibition were measured at the end of 24 hours, 6th day, and 29th day. Results: On intergroup comparison, the difference in the antibacterial activity was found to be highly significant (p < 0.001). Among the various groups evaluated, group IIa showed the highest antibacterial activity against E. faecalis followed by group II, group Ia, and the least activity being shown by group I throughout the experimental periods. On intragroup comparison at different time intervals, a maximum zone of inhibition was seen at 24 hours with a p value < 0.05 in all the tested groups. Conclusion: Incorporation of 2.5% triclosan into zinc oxide eugenol and Endoflas FS enhanced the antimicrobial activity of both the root canal filling materials with lasting antimicrobial activity even at the end of the 29th day. Clinical significance: The antimicrobial efficacy of a root canal filling material is an ideal requirement, which will help in combating the residual microflora present in the root canal system following chemomechanical preparation. The addition of an antimicrobial agent such as triclosan to the root canal filling materials, enhances their antimicrobial efficacy significantly and thus, rendering the pulpectomy-treated tooth with a better prognosis.


PDF Share
  1. Reddy S, Ramakrishna Y. Evaluation of antimicrobial efficacy of various root canal filling materials used in primary teeth: a microbiological study. J Clin Pediatr Dent 2007;31(3):193–198. DOI: 10.17796/jcpd.31.3.t73r4061424j2578.
  2. Praveen P, Anantharaj A, Karthik V, et al. A review of the obturating material for primary teeth. SRM Univers J Dent Scie 2011;2(1):42–44.
  3. Chawla HS, Setia S, Gupta N, et al. Evaluation of a mixture of zinc oxide, calcium hydroxide, and sodium fluoride as a new root canal filling material for primary teeth. J Indian Soc Pedod Prev Dent 2008;26(2):53–58. DOI: 10.4103/0970-4388.41616.
  4. Queiroz AM, Nelson-Filho P, Silva LA, et al. Antibacterial activity of root canal filling materials for primary teeth: zinc oxide and eugenol cement, Calen paste thickened with zinc oxide, Sealapex and EndoREZ. Braz Dent J 2009;20(4):290–296. DOI: 10.1590/s0103-64402009000400005.
  5. Barja-Fidalgo F, Moutinho-Ribeiro M, Oliveira MA, et al. A systematic review of root canal filling materials for deciduous teeth: is there an alternative for zinc oxide-eugenol? ISRN Dent 2011;2011:367318. DOI: 10.5402/2011/367318.
  6. Nudera WJ, Fayad MI, Johnson BR, et al. Antimicrobial effect of triclosan and triclosan with Gantrez on five common endodontic pathogens. J Endod 2007;33(10):1239–1242. DOI: 10.1016/j.joen.2007.06.009.
  7. Garcia-Godoy F. Evaluation of an Iodoform paste in root canal therapy for infected primary teeth. ASDC J Dent Child 1987;54(1):30–34.
  8. Kriplani R, Thosar N, Baliga MS, et al. Comparative evaluation of antimicrobial efficacy of various root canal filling materials along with aloevera used in primary teeth: a microbiological study. J Clin Pediatr Dent 2013;37(3):257–262. DOI: 10.17796/jcpd.37.3.j62u53q2300484x5.
  9. Sainulabdeen S, Neelakantan P, Ramesh S, et al. Antibacterial activity of triclosan incorporated glass ionomer cements-an in vitro pilot study. J Clin Pediatr Dent 2010;35(2):157–161. DOI: 10.17796/jcpd.35.2.96747l52725n608x.
  10. Jha M, Atil SD, Sevekar S, et al. Pediatric obturating materials and techniques: A review. J Contemp Dentis 2011;1(2):27–32. DOI: 10.5005/jcd-1-2-27.
  11. Lin LM, Pascon EA, Skribner J, et al. Clinical, radiographic, and histologic study of endodontic treatment failures. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol 1991;71(5):603–611. DOI: 10.1016/0030-4220(91)90371-i.
  12. Love RM, Jenkinson HF. Invasion of dentinal tubules by oral bacteria. Crit Rev Oral Biol Med 2002;13(2):171–183. DOI: 10.1177/154411130201300207.
  13. Molander A, Reit C, Dahlén G. The antimicrobial effect of calcium hydroxide in root canals pretreated with 5% iodine potassium iodide. Endod Dent Traumatol 1999;15(5):205–209. DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-9657.1999.tb00775.x.
  14. Sundqvist G, Figdor D. Life as an endodontic pathogen. Ecological differences between the untreated and root-filled root canals. Endodontic Topics 2003;6(1):3–28. DOI: 10.1111/j.1601-1546.2003.00054.x.
  15. Shantiaee Y, Dianat O, Janani A, et al. In vitro evaluation of the antibacterial activity of three root canal sealers. Iran Endod J 2010;5(1):1–5.
  16. Balouiri M, Sadiki M, Ibnsouda SK. Methods for in vitro evaluating antimicrobial activity: a review. J Pharm Anal 2016;6(2):71–79. DOI: 10.1016/j.jpha.2015.11.005.
  17. Kaiwar A, Nadig G, Hegde J, et al. Assessment of antimicrobial activity of endodontic sealers on Enterococcus faecalis: an in vitro study. World J of Dent 2012;3(1):26–31. DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10015-1123.
  18. Navit S, Jaiswal N, Khan SA, et al. Antimicrobial efficacy of contemporary obturating materials used in primary teeth - an in-vitro study. J Clin Diagn Res 2016;10(9):ZC09–ZC12. DOI: 10.7860/JCDR/2016/21883.8426.
  19. Kothari A, Langalia A. Comparative evaluation of the antimicrobial activity of different endodontic sealers on Enterococcus faecalis – an in vitro study. NJIRM 2013;4(3):121–127.
  20. Cobankara FK, Altinöz HC, Ergani O, et al. In vitro antibacterial activities of root-canal sealers by using two different methods. J Endod 2004;30(1):57–60. DOI: 10.1097/00004770-200401000- 00013.
  21. Fuss Z, Charniaque O, Pilo R, et al. Effect of various mixing ratios on antibacterial properties and hardness of endodontic sealers. J Endod 2000;26(9):519–522. DOI: 10.1097/00004770-200009000-00008.
  22. Kaplan AE, Picca M, Gonzalez MI, et al. Antimicrobial effect of six endodontic sealers: an in vitro evaluation. Endod Dent Traumatol 1999;15(1):42–45. DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-9657.1999.tb00748.x.
PDF Share
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.