Does aPDT reduce bacterial load in endodontic infected teeth? A systematic review and meta-analysis.

This systematic review investigated whether antimicrobial photodynamic therapy (aPDT) after chemomechanical root canal disinfection (CD) yields a greater microbial load reduction than only CD. An electronic literature search was conducted on four databases up to November 2022, with no language or publication date restrictions. Randomized and non-randomized clinical trials were included if participants had a primary endodontic infection in permanent teeth, and if microbial loads before and after using aPDT were compared. Two researchers independently screened titles and abstracts to determine study eligibility. Assessments included risk of bias and methodological quality. This review was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42020181783). Eight studies were included in the qualitative analysis, and six were eligible for meta-analysis. In the random effects model, aPDT significantly improved the results of root canal disinfection when compared with standard protocols for cleaning and shaping (p = 0.04, 95% CI -1.72, -0.05). Subgroup analysis suggested that aPDT has a better effect on reducing the load of anaerobic microorganisms (p = 0.003, 95% CI -3.36, -0.69). The use of aPDT as an adjunct to chemomechanical disinfection promotes additional reduction of the microbial load and, therefore, seems to improve the results of root canal treatments in permanent teeth with a primary endodontic infection. However, certainty of evidence should be improved.

In vitro antibacterial activity of a silicone-based endodontic sealer and two conventional sealers.

The aim of this study was to evaluate whether the modification in the silver component is capable of providing GuttaFlow 2 with antibacterial activity against Enterococcus faecalis compared with epoxy resin-based (AH Plus) and zinc oxide and eugenol-based (Endofill) sealers. The antibacterial activity was evaluated using a reference strain of E. faecalis (ATCC 29212). Freshly mixed sealers were subjected to the agar diffusion test (ADT), while the direct contact test (DCT) was performed after materials setting. ADT results were obtained through measurements, in millimeters, of the inhibition zones promoted by the materials, using a digital caliper. In DCT, values of CFU/mL promoted by the three sealers were compared in three experimental periods (1 min, 1 h, and 24 h). The data were analyzed using Kruskal-Wallis and Dunn post-hoc tests (p < 0.05). In both ADT and DCT, GuttaFlow 2 presented no effect against E. faecalis, while Endofill and AH Plus showed similar inhibition zones. Endofill was the only material capable of reducing bacterial growth in DCT. In conclusion, modifications in the silver particle of GuttaFlow 2 did not result in a sealer with antibacterial effect against E. faecalis.

In vitro antibacterial activity of a silicone-based endodontic sealer and two conventional sealers

Abstract The aim of this study was to evaluate whether the modification in the silver component is capable of providing GuttaFlow 2 with antibacterial activity against Enterococcus faecalis compared with epoxy resin-based (AH Plus) and zinc oxide and eugenol-based (Endofill) sealers. The antibacterial activity was evaluated using a reference strain of E. faecalis (ATCC 29212). Freshly mixed sealers were subjected to the agar diffusion test (ADT), while the direct contact test (DCT) was performed after materials setting. ADT results were obtained through measurements, in millimeters, of the inhibition zones promoted by the materials, using a digital caliper. In DCT, values of CFU/mL promoted by the three sealers were compared in three experimental periods (1 min, 1 h, and 24 h). The data were analyzed using Kruskal-Wallis and Dunn post-hoc tests (p < 0.05). In both ADT and DCT, GuttaFlow 2 presented no effect against E. faecalis, while Endofill and AH Plus showed similar inhibition zones. Endofill was the only material capable of reducing bacterial growth in DCT. In conclusion, modifications in the silver particle of GuttaFlow 2 did not result in a sealer with antibacterial effect against E. faecalis.

À espera do espetáculo: relato de uma célula-tronco / Waiting for the show: report of a stem cell

Todas nós fomos formadas durante a embriogênese. Algumas de nós, as escolhidas, vieram do epitélio bucal e outras, do ectomesênquima (tecido de origem neural). Me refiro às escolhidas por que, ainda na fase intrauterina do ser humano que eu costumava habitar, elas receberam o estímulo necessário para participar do espetáculo clássico intitulado “A formação dentária”, e se diferenciaram em lindas células ameloblásticas, odontoblásticas, cementoblásticas ou osteoblásticas. Cada uma tinha uma função específica, e algumas delas exercem essa função até hoje.(AU) [...]

Tissue reactions to a new mineral trioxide aggregate-containing endodontic sealer.

INTRODUCTION: The purpose of this study was to analyze the connective tissue reactions to MTA Fillapex (Ângelus Indústria de Produtos Odontlógicos Ltda, Londrina, Brazil) compared with a zinc oxide-based sealer (EndoFill; Dentsply Indústria e Comérico Ltda, Petrópolis, Brazil) and an epoxy resin-based material (AH Plus; Dentsply DeTrey GmbH, Konstanz, Germany) in Wistar rats. METHODS: Polyethylene tubes containing the test materials and empty polyethylene tubes (control) were implanted in the subcutaneous tissue of 12 rats. Empty tubes were used as a negative control. After 7 and 60 days (n = 6 per period), observations were made for cellular inflammatory components, fibrous condensation, and abscess formation. Comparisons among the groups and between the experimental periods were made using 2-way analysis of variance and the Bonferroni post hoc test (P < .05). RESULTS: At the end of the 7-day experimental period, all sealers scored higher than the control group for the variable lymphocytes, and MTA Fillapex presented lower fiber condensation compared with empty tubes. After 60 days, macrophages and lymphocytes scored significantly higher for MTA Fillapex and EndoFill compared with the negative control, and AH Plus showed similar results related to the empty tubes. Comparing the materials' responses at the end of the 2 evaluated periods, for EndoFill samples the variable neutrophils was detected less after 60 days. Both EndoFill and MTA Fillapex presented increased fiber condensation after 60 days. CONCLUSIONS: Although none of the sealers promoted ideal tissue responses, AH Plus presented the best outcomes. Although MTA Fillapex contains MTA powder, it presented no biocompatibility advantages when compared with AH Plus and EndoFill.