ENTEROCOCCUS FAECALIS BİYOFİLM ELİMİNASYONUNUN ER:YAG MODALİTELERİNE (PIPS VE SWEEPS) GÖRE KARŞILAŞTIRILMASI

Yıl 2021, Cilt: 8 Sayı: 3, 750 - 757, 31.12.2021

Banu Arıcıoğlu Fatma Pertek Hatipoğlu Ömer Hatipoğlu İlkay Bahçeci

https://doi.org/10.15311/selcukdentj.805466

Öz

Background and purpose: To determine the effectiveness of novel two Er:YAG lasers, photon-initiated photoacoustic streaming (PIPS\SSP) and shock wave-enhanced emission photoacoustic streaming (SWEEPS\AutoSWEEPS) in terms of removal Enterococcus faecalis (E. faecalis) with or without antimicrobial agents (NaOCl and chlorhexidine gluconate).
Methods: Forty-two extracted single-rooted mandibular premolars were prepared, sterilized, and then inoculated with E. faecalis for 4 weeks, and randomly divided into to two main and three subgroups (n= 7). Group Ia ( PIPS + distilled water), Group Ib (PIPS + 5% NaOCl), Group Ic (PIPS + CHX), and Group IIa (SWEEPS + distilled water), Group IIb (SWEEPS + 5% NaOCl), and Group IIc (SWEEPS + CHX). Following incubation for 48 hours at 37°C, the colonies formed (CFU) were counted.
Results: NaOCl and CHX activated with PIPS\SSP or SWEEPS\AutoSWEEPS modalities showed significantly higher reduction rates than distilled water activated with both laser-activated methods (p<0.05), but no significant differences were detected between the NaOCl and CHX groups. Besides, in all groups, no significant difference was detected between PIPS\SSP and SWEEPS\AutoSWEEPS performances in the reduction of CFU counts (p>0.05).
Interpretation: Even novel laser activation methods or modalities are not sufficient alone to adequately reduce bacterial load and using antimicrobial agents with laser activation is necessary for the best reduction for microbial elimination. Novel SWEEPS\AutoSWEEPS modalıty with the conical 600μm tip showed no increased efficacy compared with PIPS\SSP mode. Besides, smaller fiber tip may increase the success of applications for minimally invasive access cavities and preparation.

Anahtar Kelimeler

endodontics, ER:YAG lazer, PIPS, SWEEPS, disinfection

Kaynakça

• References 1. Siqueira Jr JF. Aetiology of root canal treatment failure: why well‐treated teeth can fail. International endodontic journal 2001;34:1-10.
• 2. George S, Kishen A, Song P. The role of environmental changes on monospecies biofilm formation on root canal wall by Enterococcus faecalis. Journal of endodontics 2005;31:867-872.
• 3. Distel JW, Hatton JF, Gillespie MJ. Biofilm formation in medicated root canals. Journal of endodontics 2002;28:689-693.
• 4. Sundqvist G, Figdor D, Persson S, Sjögren U. Microbiologic analysis of teeth with failed endodontic treatment and the outcome of conservative re-treatment. Oral Surgery, Oral Medicine, Oral Pathology, Oral Radiology, and Endodontology 1998;85:86-93.
• 5. Gordon W, Atabakhsh VA, Meza F, et al. The antimicrobial efficacy of the erbium, chromium: yttrium-scandium-gallium-garnet laser with radial emitting tips on root canal dentin walls infected with Enterococcus faecalis. The Journal of the American Dental Association 2007;138:992-1002.
• 6. Blanken J, De Moor RJG, Meire M, Verdaasdonk R. Laser induced explosive vapor and cavitation resulting in effective irrigation of the root canal. Part 1: a visualization study. Lasers in Surgery and Medicine: The Official Journal of the American Society for Laser Medicine and Surgery 2009;41:514-519.
• 7. Gomes B, Ferraz C, Berber V, Teixeira F, Souza‐Filho F. In vitro antimicrobial activity of several concentrations of sodium hypochlorite and chlorhexidine gluconate in the elimination of Enterococcus faecalis. International endodontic journal 2001;34:424-428.
• 8. Gu L-s, Kim JR, Ling J, Choi KK, Pashley DH, Tay FR. Review of contemporary irrigant agitation techniques and devices. Journal of endodontics 2009;35:791-804.
• 9. Yasuda Y, Kawamorita T, Yamaguchi H, Saito T. Bactericidal effect of Nd: YAG and Er: YAG lasers in experimentally infected curved root canals. Photomedicine and laser surgery 2010;28:S-75-S-78.
• 10. DiVito E, Lloyd A. ER: YAG laser for 3-dimensional debridement of canal systems: use of photon-induced photoacoustic streaming. Dentistry today 2012;31:122, 124-127.
• 11. Lukač N, Gregorčič P, Jezeršek M. Optodynamic phenomena during laser-activated irrigation within root canals. International Journal of Thermophysics 2016;37:66.
• 12. Lukac N, Muc BT, Jezersek M, Lukac M. Photoacoustic endodontics using the novel SWEEPS Er: YAG laser modality. J Laser Health Acad 2017;1:1-7.
• 13. Jezeršek M, Jereb T, Lukač N, Tenyi A, Lukač M, Fidler A. Evaluation of Apical Extrusion During Novel Er: YAG Laser-Activated Irrigation Modality. Photobiomodulation, photomedicine, and laser surgery 2019;37:544-550.
• 14. Sood S, Malhotra M, Das B, Kapil A. Enterococcal infections & antimicrobial resistance. Indian Journal of Medical Research 2008;128:111.
• 15. Sirtes G, Waltimo T, Schaetzle M, Zehnder M. The effects of temperature on sodium hypochlorite short-term stability, pulp dissolution capacity, and antimicrobial efficacy. Journal of Endodontics 2005;31:669-671.
• 16. Siqueira Jr JF, Rôças IN, Paiva SS, Guimarães-Pinto T, Magalhães KM, Lima KC. Bacteriologic investigation of the effects of sodium hypochlorite and chlorhexidine during the endodontic treatment of teeth with apical periodontitis. Oral Surgery, Oral Medicine, Oral Pathology, Oral Radiology, and Endodontology 2007;104:122-130.
• 17. Ferraz CC, Gomes BP, Zaia AA, Teixeira FB, Souza-Filho FJ. Comparative study of the antimicrobial efficacy of chlorhexidine gel, chlorhexidine solution and sodium hypochlorite as endodontic irrigants. Brazilian dental journal 2007;18:294-298.
• 18. Sahar-Helft S, Stabholtz A, Moshonov J, Gutkin V, Redenski I, Steinberg D. Effect of Er: YAG laser-activated irrigation solution on Enterococcus faecalis biofilm in an ex-vivo root canal model. Photomedicine and laser surgery 2013;31:334-341.
• 19. Cheng X, Chen B, Qiu J, et al. Bactericidal effect of Er: YAG laser combined with sodium hypochlorite irrigation against Enterococcus faecalis deep inside dentinal tubules in experimentally infected root canals. Journal of medical microbiology 2016;65:176-187.
• 20. Cheng X, Guan S, Lu H, et al. Evaluation of the bactericidal effect of Nd: YAG, Er: YAG, Er, Cr: YSGG laser radiation, and antimicrobial photodynamic therapy (aPDT) in experimentally infected root canals. Lasers in surgery and medicine 2012;44:824-831.
• 21. Meire M, De Prijck K, Coenye T, Nelis H, De Moor R. Effectiveness of different laser systems to kill Enterococcus faecalis in aqueous suspension and in an infected tooth model. International Endodontic Journal 2009;42:351-359.
• 22. Matsumoto H, Yoshimine Y, Akamine A. Visualization of irrigant flow and cavitation induced by Er: YAG laser within a root canal model. Journal of endodontics 2011;37:839-843.
• 23. Lukac N, Lukac M, Jezersek M. QSP Mode Characteristics of 3rd Generation ASP Powered Er: YAG Dental Lasers, J. LA&HA-J Laser Health Acad 2016;2016:1-5.
• 24. Galler K, Grubmüller V, Schlichting R, et al. Penetration depth of irrigants into root dentine after sonic, ultrasonic and photoacoustic activation. International endodontic journal 2019.
• 25. Ivanusic T, Lukac M, Lukac N, Jezersek M. SSP/SWEEPS Endodontics with the SkyPulse Er: YAG Dental Laser.
• 26. Mohammadi Z. Sodium hypochlorite in endodontics: an update review. International dental journal 2008;58:329-341.
• 27. Macedo R, Wesselink P, Zaccheo F, Fanali D, Van Der Sluis L. Reaction rate of NaOCl in contact with bovine dentine: effect of activation, exposure time, concentration and pH. International Endodontic Journal 2010;43:1108-1115.
• 28. Peters OA, Bardsley S, Fong J, Pandher G, DiVito EJJoe. Disinfection of root canals with photon-initiated photoacoustic streaming. 2011;37:1008-1012.
• 29. Sahar-Helft S, Slutzky-Goldberg I, Moshonov J, et al. Synergistic effect of Er: YAG laser irradiation in combination with chlorhexidine on the viability of Enterococcus faecalis: an in vitro study. Photomedicine and laser surgery 2011;29:753-758.
• 30. DiVito E, Peters OA, Olivi G. Effectiveness of the erbium: YAG laser and new design radial and stripped tips in removing the smear layer after root canal instrumentation. Lasers in medical science 2012;27:273-280.
• 31. Pedulla E, Genovese C, Campagna E, Tempera G, Rapisarda E. Decontamination efficacy of photon‐initiated photoacoustic streaming (PIPS) of irrigants using low‐energy laser settings: an ex vivo study. International endodontic journal 2012;45:865-870.
• 32. Seet AN, Zilm PS, Gully NJ, Cathro PR. Qualitative comparison of sonic or laser energisation of 4% sodium hypochlorite on an Enterococcus faecalis biofilm grown in vitro. Australian Endodontic Journal 2012;38:100-106.
• 33. Gulabivala K, Stock C, Lewsey J, Ghori S, Ng YL, Spratt D. Effectiveness of electrochemically activated water as an irrigant in an infected tooth model. International endodontic journal 2004;37:624-631.
• 34. Cogulu D, Uzel A, Oncag O, Aksoy SC, Eronat C. Detection of Enterococcus faecalis in necrotic teeth root canals by culture and polymerase chain reaction methods. European journal of dentistry 2007;1:216.
• 35. Koçak S, Koçak MM, Sağlam BC, Aktaş E. Efficacy of three irrigation agitation techniques on bacterial elimination: a microbiologic and microscopic evaluation. Scanning: The Journal of Scanning Microscopies 2014;36:512-516.
• 36. Agrawal V, Rao M, Dhingra K, Gopal VR, Mohapatra A, Mohapatra A. An in vitro comparison of antimicrobial effcacy of three root canal irrigants-BioPure MTAD, 2% chlorhexidine gluconate and 5.25% sodium hypochlorite as a final rinse against E. faecalis. J Contemp Dent Pract 2013;14:842-847.
• 37. Deplazes P, Peters O, Barbakow F. Comparing Apical Preparations of Root Canals Shaped by Nickel-Titanium Rotary Instruments and Nickel–Titanium Hand Instruments. Journal of endodontics 2001;27:196-202.