Display options
Share it on

J Clin Exp Dent. 2017 Apr 01;9(4):e539-e544. doi: 10.4317/jced.53526. eCollection 2017 Apr.

Evaluation of Antibacterial Efficacy of Photodynamic Therapy vs. 2.5% NaOCl against .

Journal of clinical and experimental dentistry

Maryam Janani, Farnaz Jafari, Mohammad Samiei, Farzaneh Lotfipour, Ailar Nakhlband, Negin Ghasemi, Tannaz Salari

Affiliations

  1. Assistant Professor, Endodontics Department, Dentistry Faculty, Tabriz University of Medical Sciences.
  2. Department of Endodontics, Dental School, Tabriz Branch, Islamic Azad University.
  3. Associate Professor, Endodontics Department, Dentistry Faculty, Tabriz University of Medical Sciences.
  4. Professor, Faculty of Pharmacy, Tabriz University of Medical Sciences, Tabriz, Iran.
  5. Research Center for Pharmaceutical nanotechnology, Tabriz University of Medical Sciences.
  6. Dentist, Tabriz University of Medical Sciences.

PMID: 28469819 PMCID: PMC5410674 DOI: 10.4317/jced.53526

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Bacteria like

MATERIAL AND METHODS: Sixty extracted human upper central incisors were selected and sterilized in an autoclave. The root canals were infected with

RESULTS: Inhibition of bacterial growth in all the experimental samples was significantly more than that in the control group. There was a significant difference between photodynamic therapy and 2.5% NaOCl. The effect of NaOCl in all the samples was better than photodynamic therapy. The results of the mean CT (cyclic threshold) were 40, 30.2 and 15.35 for 2.5% NaOCl, photodynamic therapy and control group, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS: Based on the results of this experimental study, 2.5% NaOCl eliminated

Conflict of interest statement

Conflict of interest statement:The authors hereby report no conflicts of interest with regards to this work.

References

  1. Int Endod J. 2001 Jul;34(5):399-405 - PubMed
  2. J Clin Exp Dent. 2016 Jul 01;8(3):e230-5 - PubMed
  3. Br Dent J. 2006 Mar 25;200(6):337-41, discussion 329 - PubMed
  4. Int Endod J. 2007 Feb;40(2):112-9 - PubMed
  5. Photodiagnosis Photodyn Ther. 2015 Sep;12(3):393-400 - PubMed
  6. Iran Endod J. 2016 Summer;11(3):192-7 - PubMed
  7. Dent Update. 2014 Jan-Feb;41(1):51-2, 54, 56-8 passim - PubMed
  8. Arch Oral Biol. 2005 Jun;50(6):575-83 - PubMed
  9. J Endod. 2006 Feb;32(2):93-8 - PubMed
  10. Photodiagnosis Photodyn Ther. 2015 Jun;12(2):244-51 - PubMed
  11. J Clin Laser Med Surg. 2002 Feb;20(1):17-21 - PubMed
  12. Int Endod J. 2008 Mar;41(3):227-39 - PubMed
  13. J Conserv Dent. 2011 Jan;14(1):2-5 - PubMed
  14. Photodiagnosis Photodyn Ther. 2016 Mar;13:238-43 - PubMed
  15. Br Dent J. 2007 May 12;202(9):555-9 - PubMed
  16. J Clin Exp Dent. 2012 Feb 01;4(1):e34-9 - PubMed
  17. Iran Endod J. 2017 Winter;12 (1):98-102 - PubMed
  18. Photomed Laser Surg. 2014 May;32(5):245-51 - PubMed
  19. J Endod. 2006 Oct;32(10):979-84 - PubMed
  20. J Conserv Dent. 2015 Nov-Dec;18(6):474-8 - PubMed
  21. J Periodontol. 2008 Sep;79(9):1620-9 - PubMed
  22. J Clin Laser Med Surg. 1997 Feb;15(1):29-31 - PubMed
  23. Lasers Med Sci. 2015 Sep;30(7):1867-72 - PubMed
  24. Aust Endod J. 2004 Dec;30(3):93-8 - PubMed
  25. Open Dent J. 2009 Jun 09;3:120-4 - PubMed
  26. Minerva Stomatol. 2016 Oct;65(5):269-75 - PubMed
  27. J Conserv Dent. 2013 Mar;16(2):167-70 - PubMed
  28. Acta Odontol Latinoam. 2014;27(2):63-5 - PubMed
  29. J Endod. 2006 Mar;32(3):173-7 - PubMed
  30. J Endod. 2002 Oct;28(10):679-83 - PubMed
  31. Dent Clin North Am. 2004 Oct;48(4):809-32, vi - PubMed
  32. J Endod. 1997 Dec;23(12):725-7 - PubMed
  33. J Endod. 2011 Jun;37(6):856-9 - PubMed
  34. Photomed Laser Surg. 2008 Jun;26(3):209-13 - PubMed
  35. Biomed Res Int. 2016;2016:8421656 - PubMed

Publication Types