The cleanliness differences of root canal walls after irrigated with East Java propolis extract and sodium hypoclorite solutions

Tamara Yuanita

DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.20473/j.djmkg.v50.i1.p6-9
Abstract viewed = 249 times | PDF downloaded = 148 times

Abstract


Background: Root canal instrumentation produces smear layer that covers dentine tubules of the root canal surface. Smear layer is organic and inorganic particles that have to be removed. East Java propolis extracts contais of saponin components used as a natural surfactant. 2.5% NaOCl and 5% NaOCl solutions have been widely used for irrigation in root canal treatment. Purpose: The purpose of this study was to analyze the cleanliness of the root canal walls, irrigated with aquadest, 8% East Java propolis extract, 2.5% NaOCl and 5% NaOCl. Method: Forty extracted teeth with straight single root canals were randomly divided into four groups
(n=10). The specimens were prepared with ProTaper. During instrumentation, the root canals were irrigated with different solutions: Control Group irrigated with aquadest; Group 1 irrigated with 8% East Java propolis extract; Group 2 irrigated with 2.5% NaOCl and Group 3 irrigated with 5% NaOCl. The root canals were cut at apical third and SEM scores were tested by using Mann-Whitney test at the significance level of p=0.05 and Median Control test. Result: The results of Mann-Whitney Test, there were significant differences between control group with 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.

Keywords


propolis extract; NaOCl; root canal walls

Full Text:

PDF

References


Torabinejad M, Walton RE. Endodontics, principles and practice. 4th ed. St Louis, Missouri: Sanders, Elseviers Inc; 2009. p. 258-86.

Zehnder M. Root canal irigants. J Endod 2006; 32(5): 389-98.

Cohen S, Hargreaves KM. Cohen’s pathway of the pulp. 10th ed. St Louis Missouri: Mosby Inc; 2011. p. 529-58.

Van Frounhover A. Dental materials at a glance. Oxford: Blackwell; 2010. p. 46-7.

Mohammdi Z. Sodium hypoclorite in endodontics: an update review. Int Dent J 2008; 58(6): 329-41.

Farren ST, Sadoff RS, Penna KJ. Sodium hypoclorite chemical burns. SDJ 2008; 74(1): 61-71.

Ingle JI, Bakland LK, Baumgartner JC. Endodontics. 6th ed. Shelton USA: Mc Graw-Hill; 2008. p. 992-1018.

Surendra NS, Bhushanam M, Raikumar H. Antimicrobial activity of propolis Trigona Sp and apis mellifera of Kamataka India. PJMR 2012; 2(2): 80-85.

Temiz A, Şener A, Tüylü AÖ, Sorkun K, Salih B. Antibacterial activity of bee propolis samples from different geographical regions of turkey against to two food-borne pathogens, Salmonela Enteritidis and Listeria monocytogenes. Turk J Biol 2011; 503-11.

Remanuskiene K, Inkeniene AM, Savickas A. Analysis of the antimicrobial activity of propolis and lisozyme in semisolid emulsion system. Acta Poloniae Pharm and Drug Research 2009; 66(6): 681-8.

Shahravan A, Haghdoost AA, Adl A. Effect of smear layer on sealing ability of coronal obturation a systematic review and meta analysis. J Endod 2007; 33(2): 96-105.

Yuanita T, Hutagalung J, Widjiastuti I, Rulianto M, Mooduto L. Minimum Bacterial Concentration of East Java Propolis to Biofilm of Enterococcus faecalis. E Journal APIMONDIA Kiev, Ukraina. 2013.

Perard M, Goff A. Study of Rins Endo action on the smear layer and debris removal by scanning electron microscopy. J Endod 2013; 7(1): 15-21.

Halackova Z, Martina K. Rinsing of the root canal. SMFM 2003; 76 (1): 49-54.

Schaudinn C, Carr G, Gorur A, Jaramillo D, Costerton JW, Webster P. Imaging of endodontic biofilm by combined microscopy. J Microsc 2009; 235(2): 124-7.


Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.