Search

To evaluate the antibacterial efficacy of HybenX, an endodontic irrigant against Enterococcus faecalis biofilm and determine its efficacy in removal of smear layer. Forty root canals were inoculated with E. faecalis for three weeks, divided into 4 groups and irrigated with: Group1: 5 ml 2.5% sodium hypochlorite; Group2: 5 ml 2% chlorhexidine gluconate; Group3: 5 ml HybenX; Group4: 5 ml distilled water (control). Dentin shavings were collected and plated on agar plates, followed by colony forming unit (CFU) determination. For smear layer removal examination, 30 single rooted teeth were instrumented and divided into 3 groups and treated with: GroupI: 5 ml of 17% EDTA; GroupII:5 ml of HybenX; and GroupIII: 5 ml of distilled water. Samples were then subjected to SEM examination. All irrigants showed a significant reduction in CFUs compared to the control group (P⟨ .001), but none compared to each other. Regarding smear layer removal in the apical third, EDTA removed smear layer more effectively than HybenX (P = .014). HybenX demonstrated good antimicrobial efficacy against E. faecalis biofilm and removed the smear layer effectively in coronal and middle third of the root canal system. HybenX can be considered as a promising irrigating agent in root canal treatment of infected teeth., (Copyright© 2021 Dennis Barber Ltd.)

This study evaluated different irrigation methods in smear layer removal from the root canal walls using maleic acid (MA). Maxillary anterior teeth (N=30, n=10 per group) were decoronated, canals were enlarged with Protaper (size F4) and allocated to three groups: EndoUltra: 2.5 ml of 7% MA was irrigated for 30 s, followed by EndoUltra activation for 30 s; EndoSafe: EndoSafe irrigation system was used for 1 minute using 5 ml of 7% MA; Side-vented needle: 30 gauge needle irrigation was performed for 1 min using 5 ml of 7% MA. After SEM analysis, the inter-examiner reliability was verified using Kendall's Co-efficient and data were analyzed using Pearson Chi-Square test. No statistical significant differences were found between the two examiners (p⟩0.05). In intra-group comparison, needle and EndoSafe irrigation demonstrated significantly better smear layer removal at middle third of the root canal system (p⟨0.05) when compared to apical third. In inter-group comparison, smear layer was minimally removed with needle irrigation. In the apical third, EndoUltra group removed smear layer more effectively. Endosafe needle irrigation in combination with 7% MA removed the smear layer in the root canal at best, while the EndoUltra performed the best at the apical third of the root., (Copyright© 2019 Dennis Barber Ltd.)