Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Montrer: 20 | 50 | 100
Résultats 1 - 1 de 1
Filtrer
Plus de filtres










Base de données
Gamme d'année
1.
BMC Oral Health ; 19(1): 174, 2019 08 06.
Article de Anglais | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31387578

RÉSUMÉ

BACKGROUND: This study evaluated the antibacterial efficiency and ability of propolis to promote regeneration of immature permanent non-vital dogs' teeth. METHODS: Ninety six immature permanent premolars teeth in 6 mongrel dogs were divided randomly into: experimental teeth (N = 72) and control teeth (N = 24). Periapical pathosis was induced in all experimental and positive control teeth. Experimental teeth were classified according to the used intra-canal medication into: group I (N = 36), propolis paste was used and group II (N = 36), triple antibiotic paste (TAP) was used. Bacteriologic samplings were collected before and after exposure to intra-canal medicaments. After the disinfection period (3 weeks), revascularization was induced in all experimental teeth. Each group was subdivided according to the root canal orifice plug into: subgroup A (N = 18), propolis paste was used and subgroup B (N = 18), mineral trioxide aggregates (MTA) was used. Each subgroup was further subdivided according to the evaluation period into 3 subdivisions (6 teeth each): subdivision 1; after 2 weeks, subdivision 2; after one month and subdivision 3; after 2 months. Positive control group had 12 teeth with induced untreated periapical pathosis. Negative control group had 12 untouched sound teeth. All teeth were evaluated with radiography and histology. The bacteriologic and radiographic data were analyzed using repeated measures ANOVA and post-hoc Tukey tests. The histologic data were analyzed using Kruskal-Wallis test, Mann-Whitney U test with Bonferroni's adjustment and Chi-square test. The significance level was set at P ≤ .05. RESULTS: There was no significant difference in the antibacterial effectiveness between TAP and propolis groups (P > .05). In all subdivisions, there was no significant difference between the experimental groups in terms of increase in root length and dentin thickness, decrease in apical closure, new hard tissue formation, vital tissue formation inside the pulp canal and apical closure scores (P > .05). CONCLUSION: Propolis can be comparable with TAP as a disinfection treatment option in regenerative endodontic. As a root canal orifice plug after revascularization of necrotic immature permanent teeth in dogs, propolis induces a progressive increase in root length and dentin thickness and a decrease in apical diameter similar to those of MTA.


Sujet(s)
Antibactériens/administration et posologie , Nécrose pulpaire/traitement médicamenteux , Pulpe dentaire/effets des médicaments et des substances chimiques , Dentine/effets des médicaments et des substances chimiques , Propolis/administration et posologie , Endodontie régénératrice/méthodes , Traitement de canal radiculaire/méthodes , Racine dentaire/effets des médicaments et des substances chimiques , Animaux , Antibactériens/usage thérapeutique , Pulpe dentaire/vascularisation , Pulpe dentaire/physiologie , Dentine/vascularisation , Dentine/physiologie , Chiens , Tissu périapical/vascularisation , Tissu périapical/effets des médicaments et des substances chimiques , Tissu périapical/physiologie , Propolis/usage thérapeutique , Répartition aléatoire , Liquides d'irrigation endocanalaire/usage thérapeutique , Apex de la racine de la dent/anatomopathologie , Racine dentaire/vascularisation , Racine dentaire/physiologie , Résultat thérapeutique
SÉLECTION CITATIONS
DÉTAIL DE RECHERCHE
...