The Antimicrobial Efficacy of Sodium Hypochlorite and Chlorhexidine in Gutta-Percha Cone Decontamination: A Systematic Review
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Search Strategy
2.2. Eligibility Criteria
2.3. Studies Selection and Data Extraction
2.4. Risk of Bias Assessment
3. Results
3.1. Risk of Bias Assessment
Nr | Leading Author, Publication Year | Sample Size | Tested Irrigants and Their Exposure Time to Gutta-percha (GP) Cones | Tested Microorganisms | Methodology | Evaluation of Antimicrobial Efficacy | Results |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | Pauletto et al. (2024) [40] | 98 GP cones | 2.5% NaOCl, 2.5% Ca(OCl)2, and 2% CHX for 1 and 5 min. | C. albicans (ATCC 2508) | GP cones were opened in aseptic conditions and contaminated with the suspension of C. albicans. Each group was immersed in each solution for 1 or 5 min and was treated with different methodologies: without agitation, ultrasonic agitation, or agitation with Easy Clean. | After the exposure time to each irrigating solution (1 or 5 min), the samples were examined for turbidity and evaluated for viable colonies. The MIC, fungicidal concentrations, biofilm destruction/inhibition, CFU, and densitometric analyses were assessed. | The most effective in biofilm destruction was observed using concentrations of NaOCl and Ca(OCl)2 twice higher than MIC; the biofilm was reduced by 32% and 35%, respectively (p < 0.001). The 2.5% Ca(OCl)2 solution was effective at all MIC concentrations (p < 0.0001). The results showed that in 1 or 5 min of agitation, treatment with 2.5% NaOCl, 2.5% Ca(OCl)2, and 2% CHX showed a significant reduction in microbial colonies compared to the saline solution (p < 0.05). In both analyses (CFUs and densitometer reading) and at both application times (1 min and 5 min), the use of CHX without agitation proved to be effective in disinfecting cones contaminated with C. albicans. |
2 | Al-Jobory et al. (2021) [35] | 40 GP cones | 5.25% NaOCl, 2% CHX, and Listerine mouthwash for 1 min. | E. faecalis (ATCC 29212) | Sterilised GP cones were immersed in broth media containing E. faecalis for 20 min. Each group was immersed in each solution for 1 min. After immersion, GP cones were rinsed, dried, and incubated in nutrient broth for 24 h and 7 days. | The CFUs for E. faecalis growth were then calculated for two time points: immediately after GP disinfection (day 0) and after the 7-day incubation period. | NaOCl completely inhibited bacterial growth at day 0 and day 7. CHX completely inhibited bacterial growth on day 0, but the CFU count of E. faecalis increased to three units by day 7. Listerine exhibited the highest bacterial growth on day 0 (CFU = 14), but there was a decrease in CFU on day 7, reaching four units. |
3 | Asnaashari et al. (2020) [36] | 70 GP cones | 5.25% NaOCl, 2% CHX, and 10% Deconex® 53 PLUS for 1 min. And low-pressure radiofrequency cold plasma (LRFCP) (30 s or 1 min). | S. aureus (ATCC 25923) | Sterilised GP cones were immersed in the S. aureus suspension and left for 30 min. Each inoculated sample was immersed in one of the disinfecting agents for 1 min, or LRFCP was applied for 30 s or 1 min. | CFUs were counted for each GP cone, with the microbial detection limit set at three CFUs. | All methods showed significant antibacterial activity in comparison with the positive control group (p = 0.05). LRFCP and 5.25% NaOCl were significantly more effective than 2% CHX (p-values for 30 s LRFCP, and one-minute LRFCP groups and NaOCl were 0.003, 0.001, and 0.003, respectively. The difference between LRFCP and 5.25% NaOCl was not significant (p > 0.05). |
4 | Chandrappa et al. (2014) [32] | 280 GP cones | 5.25% NaOCl, 2% CHX, and MTAD for 30 s, 1 min, and 5 min. | E. faecalis (ATCC29212) and S. aureus (ATCC6538) | After artificial contamination, GP cones from each group were separately immersed in the respective disinfectant solutions for 30 s, 1 min, and 5 min. | Antibacterial efficacy was assessed by immersing GP cones in disinfectants, incubating them in thioglycollate media, and counting CFUs digitally. | The mean bacterial count of E. faecalis or S. aureus was found to be lower after treating the cones with MTAD when compared with other disinfecting solutions for all time intervals tested. The 5.25% NaOCl solution was found to be the second most effective disinfecting solution, while 2% CHX was the least effective among the solutions tested. |
5 | Brito-Júnior et al. (2012) [37] | 60 GP cones | Rosmarinus officinalis extract, 2% CHX, and 2.5% NaOCL for 5 min. | E. faecalis (ATCC 4083) | The cones were transferred directly from the package for sterilisation. After contamination, GP cones were transferred to Eppendorf tubes containing 1.2 mL of one of the disinfecting solutions: 2.5% NaOCl, 2.0% CHX, or Rosmarinus officinalis extract. All disinfection procedures were performed for 5 min. | Initially, the antibacterial activity was verified by using a disc diffusion method. Bacterial growth was verified by counting CFUs. The scores used were as follows: 0 indicates the absence of CFUs, 1 indicates lower than 300 CFUs, and 2indicates higher than 300 CFUs. | The positive control had the highest CFU values. There was no difference between the disinfectant solutions evaluated, while all solutions showed similar values to the negative control. |
6 | Rai et al. (2019) [38] | 180 GP cones | 6% NaOCl, berberine chloride, chlorhexidine 2%, and cetrimide 0.2% for 1, 3, and 5 min. | E. faecalis (ATCC29212) and S. aureus (ATCC 6538) | GP cones were taken from freshly opened boxes, arranged in three groups of 30 each, and then immersed in 20 mL of the microbial suspension for one hour. Cones were then transported to sterile paper pads in Petri dishes and allowed to air dry for 10 min. This is followed by the disinfection of the cones in the NaOCL, berberine, and chlorhexidine solutions for time intervals of 1, 3, and 5 min. | The CFUs were graded. Microbial growth was also confirmed with Gram staining, colony morphology, and with a microbial growth identification kit under the microscope by an experienced microbiologist. | The mean bacterial count of E. faecalis or S. aureus was lower after treating the cones with 6% NaOCL compared with other disinfecting solutions for all time intervals tested. The CHX–cetrimide combination was found to be the second most effective disinfecting solution while the herbal irrigant berberine was the least effective. The mean bacterial count of E. faecalis or S. aureus was significantly lower (p < 0.001) after treating the cones with 6% NaOCL when compared with other disinfecting solutions for all time intervals. |
7 | Banka et al. (2024) [39] | 60 GP cones | 5.25% NaOCL, 2% CHX, and 0.1% octenidine dihydrochloride for 1 min. | E. faecalis (ATCC2912) | The GP cones were taken out from sealed packets and added into each test tube containing 20 mL of microbial suspensions of activated E. faecalis for 30 min. After artificial contamination, GP cones were immersed in the respective disinfectant solutions for 1 min. | After disinfection for 1 min, GP cones were incubated in thioglycollate, transferred to BHI agar, and then incubated aerobically before CFUs were counted using a digital colony counter. | The least number of colonies was seen for 5.25% NaOCL, while the maximum mean number of colonies was seen for the positive control group. It was observed that NaOCL was significantly more effective (p < 0.0001) than other disinfectants against E. faecalis at a 1 min time interval followed by 0.1% octenidine dihydrochloride. |
3.2. Study Characteristics
3.3. Main Study Outcomes
4. Discussion
4.1. Summary of Evidence
4.2. Limitations
5. Conclusions
Supplementary Materials
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Sjögren, U.; Figdor, D.; Persson, S.; Sundqvist, G. Influence of infection at the time of root filling on the outcome of endodontic treatment of teeth with apical periodontitis. Int. Endod. J. 1997, 30, 297–306. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Siqueira, J.F. Aetiology of root canal treatment failure: Why well-treated teeth can fail. Int. Endod. J. 2001, 34, 1–10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kowalski, J.; Rygas, J.; Homa, K.; Dobrzyński, W.; Wiglusz, R.J.; Matys, J.; Dobrzyński, M. Antibacterial Activity of Endodontic Gutta-Percha—A Systematic Review. Appl. Sci. 2024, 14, 388. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Turker, S.A.; Aslan, M.H.; Uzunoglu, E.; Ozcelik, B. Antimicrobial and structural effects of different irrigation solutions on gutta-percha cones. J. Istanb. Univ. Fac. Dent. 2015, 49, 27. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pirani, C.; Camilleri, J. Effectiveness of root canal filling materials and techniques for treatment of apical periodontitis: A systematic review. Int. Endod. J. 2023, 56, 436–454. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Valois, C.R.A.; Silva, L.P.; Azevedo, R.B. Structural effects of sodium hypochlorite solutions on gutta-percha cones: Atomic force microscopy study. J. Endod. 2005, 31, 749–751. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wieczorkiewicz, K.; Jarząbek, A.; Bakinowska, E.; Kiełbowski, K.; Pawlik, A. Microbial Dynamics in Endodontic Pathology—From Bacterial Infection to Therapeutic Interventions—A Narrative Review. Pathogens 2025, 14, 12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Smith, W.A.; Hutchison, C.A.; Scott, R.V.; Hinman, S.E.; Osborne, N.H.; Hamlin, N.J.; Frank, K.L. Evaluation of the risk of Enterococcus faecalis cross-contamination of gutta-percha cartridges. JADA Found. Sci. 2023, 2, 100021. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dioguardi, M.; Gioia, G.D.; Illuzzi, G.; Arena, C.; Caponio, V.C.A.; Caloro, G.A.; Zhurakivska, K.; Adipietro, I.; Troiano, G.; Muzio, L.L. Inspection of the Microbiota in Endodontic Lesions. Dent. J. 2019, 7, 47. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bodrumlu, E.; Alaçam, T. Evaluation of antimicrobial and antifungal effects of iodoform-integrating gutta-percha. J. Can. Dent. Assoc. 2006, 72, 733. [Google Scholar]
- Long, J.; Kreft, J.U.; Camilleri, J. Antimicrobial and ultrastructural properties of root canal filling materials exposed to bacterial challenge. J. Dent. 2020, 93, 103283. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Oztan, M.D.; Kiyan, M.; Gerçeker, D. Antimicrobial effect, in vitro, of gutta-percha points containing root canal medications against yeasts and Enterococcus faecalis. Oral Surg. Oral Med. Oral Pathol. Oral Radiol. Endodontol. 2006, 102, 410–416. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Barthel, C.R.; Zimmer, S.; Zilliges, S.; Schiller, R.; Göbel, U.B.; Roulet, J.-F. In situ antimicrobial effectiveness of chlorhexidine and calcium hydroxide: Gel and paste versus gutta-percha points. J. Endod. 2002, 28, 427–430. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Du, Q.; Yuan, S.; Zhao, S.; Fu, D.; Chen, Y.; Zhou, Y.; Cao, Y.; Gao, Y.; Xu, X.; Zhou, X.; et al. Coexistence of Candida albicans and Enterococcus faecalis increases biofilm virulence and periapical lesions in rats. Biofouling 2021, 37, 964–974. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Teles, A.M.; Pina, C.; Cardoso, I.L.; Tramontana, A.; Cardoso, M.; Duarte, A.S.; Bartolomeu, M.; Noites, R. Degree of Contamination of Gutta-Percha Points by Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA/MSSA) Strains. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2024, 25, 8566. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Thomas, C.; Minty, M.; Vinel, A.; Canceill, T.; Loubières, P.; Burcelin, R.; Kaddech, M.; Blasco-Baque, V.; Laurencin-Dalicieux, S. Oral Microbiota: A Major Player in the Diagnosis of Systemic Diseases. Diagnostics 2021, 11, 1376. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nabeshima, C.K.; de Lima Machado, M.E.; Borges Britto, M.L.; Pallotta, R.C. Effectiveness of different chemical agents for disinfection of gutta-percha cones. Aust. Endod. J. 2011, 37, 118–121. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gomes, B.P.F.d.A.; Vianna, M.E.; Matsumoto, C.U.; Rossi, V.d.P.e.S.; Zaia, A.A.; Ferraz, C.C.R.; Filho, F.J.d.S. Disinfection of gutta-percha cones with chlorhexidine and sodium hypochlorite. Oral Surg. Oral Med. Oral Pathol. Oral Radiol. Endodontol. 2005, 100, 512–517. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Carvalho, C.S.; Pinto, M.S.; Batista, S.F.; Quelemes, P.V.; Falcão, C.A.; Ferraz, M.A. Decontamination of Gutta-percha Cones employed in Endodontics. Acta Odontológica Latinoam. 2020, 33, 45–49. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Subha, N.; Prabhakar, V.; Koshy, M.; Abinaya, K.; Prabu, M.; Thangavelu, L. Efficacy of Peracetic Acid in Rapid Disinfection of Resilon and Gutta-percha Cones Compared with Sodium Hypochlorite, Chlorhexidine, and Povidone-iodine. J. Endod. 2013, 39, 1261–1264. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cardoso, C.L.; Redmerski, R.; Bittencourt, N.d.L.R.; Kotaka, C.R. Effectiveness of different chemical agents in rapid decontamination of gutta-percha cones. Braz. J. Microbiol. 2000, 31, 67–71. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jagyasi, D.R.; Chandwani, N.D.; Gunwal, M.K.; Ranka, A.S. Antimicrobial Efficacy of Acacia Nilotica (Babul) Extract and its Effectiveness in Disinfecting Gutta Percha Cones—An In Vitro Study. Indian J. Dent. Res. 2021, 32, 221. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sahinkesen, G.; Oktay, E.; Er, O.; Kocak, M.; Kilic, A. Evaluation of residual antimicrobial effects and surface changes of gutta-percha disinfected with different solutions. J. Contemp. Dent. Pract. 2011, 12, 47–51. [Google Scholar]
- Hoffmann, S.; Walter, S.; Blume, A.-K.; Fuchs, S.; Schmidt, C.; Scholz, A.; Gerlach, R.G. High-Throughput Quantification of Bacterial-Cell Interactions Using Virtual Colony Counts. Front. Cell. Infect. Microbiol. 2018, 8, 43. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Perez-Gavilan, A.; de Castro, J.V.; Arana, A.; Merino, S.; Retolaza, A.; Alves, S.A.; Francone, A.; Kehagias, N.; Sotomayor-Torres, C.M.; Cocina, D.; et al. Antibacterial activity testing methods for hydrophobic patterned surfaces. Sci. Rep. 2021, 11, 6675. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pal, A.; Altaf, N.; Mahmood, A.; Akbar, S.; Maher, N.; Kumar, N.; Zafar, M.S.; Murcia, L.; Oñate-Sánchez, R.E. Exploring the Variability in Antibacterial Testing of Resin Dental Composites among Investigators: A Narrative Review. Microbiol. Res. 2023, 14, 1736–1750. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zehnder, M. Root canal irrigants. J. Endod. 2006, 32, 389–398. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gomes, B.P.F.A.; Vianna, M.E.; Zaia, A.A.; Almeida, J.F.A.; Souza-Filho, F.J.; Ferraz, C.C.R. Chlorhexidine in endodontics. Braz. Dent. J. 2013, 24, 89–102. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- da Motta, P.G.; de Figueiredo, C.B.; Maltos, S.M.; Nicoli, J.R.; Ribeiro Sobrinho, A.P.; Maltos, K.L.; Carvalhais, H.P. Efficacy of chemical sterilization and storage conditions of gutta-percha cones. Int. Endod. J. 2001, 34, 435–439. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mohammadi, Z. Sodium hypochlorite in endodontics: An update review. Int. Dent. J. 2008, 58, 329–341. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Estrela, C.; Estrela, C.R.A.; Barbin, E.L.; Spanó, J.C.E.; Marchesan, M.A.; Pécora, J.D. Mechanism of action of sodium hypochlorite. Braz. Dent. J. 2002, 13, 113–117. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Chandrappa, M.M.; Mundathodu, N.; Srinivasan, R.; Nasreen, F.; Kavitha, P.; Shetty, A. Disinfection of gutta-percha cones using three reagents and their residual effects. J. Conserv. Dent. JCD 2014, 17, 571–574. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Higgins, J.P.T.; Thomas, J.; Chandler, J.; Cumpston, M.; Li, T.; Page, M.J.; Welch, V.A. (Eds.) Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 6.5; Cochrane: London, UK, 2024; Available online: www.training.cochrane.org/handbook (accessed on 1 August 2024).
- Page, M.J.; McKenzie, J.E.; Bossuyt, P.M.; Boutron, I.; Hoffmann, T.C.; Mulrow, C.D.; Shamseer, L.; Tetzlaff, J.M.; Akl, E.A.; Brennan, S.E.; et al. The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ 2021, 372, n71. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Al-Jobory, A.I.; Mahdee, A.F.; Alhashimi, R.A.; Suliman, S.A. Immediate and Delay Antimicrobial Activity of Three Disinfection Solutions on Gutta-Percha Cones as Routine Chair-Side Procedure. Int. Med. J. 2021, 28, 3–5. [Google Scholar]
- Asnaashari, M.; Meyari, A.; Hajrezai, R.; Paymanpour, P.; Behrooz, N. Low-Pressure Radiofrequency Cold Plasma for Disinfection of Gutta-Percha Cones. J. Res. Dent. Maxillofac. Sci. 2020, 5, 14–20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Brito-Júnior, M.; Nobre, S.A.M.; Freitas, J.C.P.; Camilo, C.C.; Faria-e-Silva, A.L. Antibacterial activity of a plant extract and its potential for disinfecting gutta-percha cones. Acta Odontol. Latinoam. AOL 2012, 25, 9–13. [Google Scholar]
- Rai, N.; Gupta, R. Comparing the Efficacy of Berberine against Sodium Hypochlorite and Chlorhexidine Cetrimide as a Chairside Disinfectant of Gutta Percha Cones. J. Clin. Diagn. Res. 2019, 13, ZC40–ZC44. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Banka, A.; Patri, G.; Pradhan, P.K.; Lath, H.; Agarwal, V.; Patri, V. Rapid Decontamination of Gutta-Percha Points- An in Vitro Comparative Study between Different Auxiliary Chemical Substances. J. Chem. Health Risks 2024, 14, 993–997. [Google Scholar]
- Pauletto, G.; Guerim, P.H.F.; Barbosa, A.B.; Lopes, L.Q.S.; Bier, C.A.S.; Marquezan, P.K. Efficacy of calcium hypochlorite in disinfection of gutta-percha cones contaminated with Candida albicans. Braz. J. Microbiol. 2024, 55, 403–410. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Prada, I.; Micó-Muñoz, P.; Giner-Lluesma, T.; Micó-Martínez, P.; Collado-Castellano, N.; Manzano-Saiz, A. Influence of microbiology on endodontic failure. Literature review. Med. Oral Patol. Oral Cir. Bucal 2019, 24, e364–e372. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Haapasalo, M.; Udnæs, T.; Endal, U. Persistent, recurrent, and acquired infection of the root canal system post-treatment. Endod. Top. 2003, 6, 29–56. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Stuart, C.H.; Schwartz, S.A.; Beeson, T.J.; Owatz, C.B. Enterococcus faecalis: Its Role in Root Canal Treatment Failure and Current Concepts in Retreatment. J. Endod. 2006, 32, 93–98. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Schirrmeister, J.F.; Liebenow, A.-L.; Braun, G.; Wittmer, A.; Hellwig, E.; Al-Ahmad, A. Detection and eradication of microorganisms in root-filled teeth associated with periradicular lesions: An in vivo study. J. Endod. 2007, 33, 536–540. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Elashiry, M.M.; Bergeron, B.E.; Tay, F.R. Enterococcus faecalis in secondary apical periodontitis: Mechanisms of bacterial survival and disease persistence. Microb. Pathog. 2023, 183, 106337. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Klager, P.; Dupont, A.A. The significance of environmental contamination of sealer and gutta-percha before endodontic obturation. Oral Surg. Oral Med. Oral Pathol. 1987, 63, 606–609. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Siqueira, J.F.; Sen, B.H. Fungi in endodontic infections. Oral Surg. Oral Med. Oral Pathol. Oral Radiol. Endodontol. 2004, 97, 632–641. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ashraf, H.; Samiee, M.; Eslami, G.; Ghodse Hosseini, M.R. Presence of Candida Albicans in Root Canal System of Teeth Requiring Endodontic Retreatment with and without Periapical Lesions. Iran. Endod. J. 2007, 2, 24–28. [Google Scholar]
- Stabholz, A.; Stabholz, A.; Friedman, S.; Heling, I.; Sela, M.N. Efficiency of different chemical agents in decontamination of gutta-percha cones. Int. Endod. J. 1987, 20, 211–216. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Giardino, L.; Savoldi, E.; Ambu, E.; Rimondini, R.; Palezona, A.; Debbia, E.A. Antimicrobial effect of MTAD, Tetraclean, Cloreximid, and sodium hypochlorite on three common endodontic pathogens. Indian J. Dent. Res. 2009, 20, 391. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Davis, J.M.; Maki, J.; Bahcall, J.K. An in vitro comparison of the antimicrobial effects of various endodontic medicaments on Enterococcus faecalis. J. Endod. 2007, 33, 567–569. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Redmerski, R.; Bulla, J.; Moreno, T.; Garcia, L.; Cardoso, C. Disinfection of Gutta-percha cones with chlorhexidine. Braz. J. Microbiol. 2007, 38, 649–655. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Arias-Moliz, M.T.; Ferrer-Luque, C.M.; González-Rodríguez, M.P.; Valderrama, M.J.; Baca, P. Eradication of Enterococcus faecalis biofilms by cetrimide and chlorhexidine. J. Endod. 2010, 36, 87–90. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Portenier, I.; Waltimo, T.M.T.; Haapasalo, M. Enterococcus faecalis– the root canal survivor and ‘star’ in post-treatment disease. Endod. Top. 2003, 6, 135–159. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jose, J.; Krishnamma, S.; Peedikayil, F.; Aman, S.; Tomy, N.; PM, J. Comparative Evaluation of Antimicrobial Activity of QMiX, 2.5% Sodium Hypochlorite, 2% Chlorhexidine, Guava Leaf Extract and Aloevera Extract Against Enterococcus faecalis and Candida albicans—An In-Vitro Study. J. Clin. Diagn. Res. 2016, 10, ZC20–ZC23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Siqueira, J.F.; Rôças, I.N. Present status and future directions: Microbiology of endodontic infections. Int. Endod. J. 2022, 55 (Suppl. S3), 512–530. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Ellepola, A.; Samaranayake, L. Adjunctive use of chlorhexidine in oral candidoses: A review. Oral Dis. 2001, 7, 11–17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Carvalhinho, S.; Costa, A.M.; Coelho, A.C.; Martins, E.; Sampaio, A. Susceptibilities of Candida albicans Mouth Isolates to Antifungal Agents, Essentials Oils and Mouth Rinses. Mycopathologia 2012, 174, 69–76. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Database | Keywords |
---|---|
PubMed https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/ | ((gutta-percha cones) OR (gutta-percha points) OR (gutta-percha)) AND ((decontamination) OR (disinfection)) AND ((solutions) OR (chemical agents)); Sort by best match (relevance), Abstract, English. |
Web of Science https://www.webofscience.com | ((gutta-percha cones) OR (gutta-percha points) OR (gutta-percha)) AND ((decontamination) OR (disinfection)) AND ((solutions) OR (chemical agents)); sort by relevance; search language: English. |
Cochrane Library https://www.cochranelibrary.com | Title, Abstract, and Keyword: ((gutta-percha cones) OR (gutta-percha points) OR (gutta-percha)) AND ((decontamination) OR (disinfection)) AND ((solutions) OR (chemical agents)); sort by relevance: search language: English. |
Scielo https://www.scielo.org/en/ | All indexes: ((gutta-percha cones) OR (gutta-percha points) OR (gutta-percha)) AND ((decontamination) OR (disinfection)) AND ((solutions) OR (chemical agents)); search language: English. |
Scopus https://www.scopus.com/ | Article title, Abstract, and Keyword: ((gutta-percha cones) OR (gutta-percha points) OR (gutta-percha)) AND ((decontamination) OR (disinfection)) AND ((solutions) OR (chemical agents)); sort by relevance; search language: English. |
LILACS (added BBO–Dentistry) https://pesquisa.bvsalud.org/ | Title, Abstract, and Subject: ((gutta-percha cones) OR (gutta-percha points) OR (gutta-percha)) AND ((decontamination) OR (disinfection)) AND ((solutions) OR (chemical agents)); sort by best match; search language: English. |
Inclusion Criteria | Exclusion Criteria |
---|---|
In vitro studies | In vivo studies Clinical case report studies Review articles Editorials Opinion studies Abstracts Letters Commentaries Conference Proceedings |
Investigating both disinfecting solutions: NaOCL (1–6%) and CHX gluconate (2%) | Only one or none of these solutions |
The exposure time of contaminated GP cones to the disinfecting solutions ranged from 0 to 10 min | Exposure time > 10 min |
Decontamination against the most prevalent microorganisms associated with endodontic infections: E. faecalis and/or S. aureus and/or C. albicans | The studies focused on testing microorganisms such as E. coli, B. subtilis, etc., while excluding E. faecalis and/or S. aureus and/or C. albicans |
The antimicrobial efficacy of disinfectant solution assessments based on the quantification of CFUs | The antimicrobial efficacy of disinfectant solution assessments based only on turbidity, modified Kirby Bauer disc diffusion, colony morphology, and Gram staining |
Full-text availability in the English language with no limitations on the date of study publication | Studies published in non-English languages and unavailable in full-text version |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2025 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Aucinaite, R.; Nedzinskiene, E.; Peciuliene, V.; Dumbryte, I. The Antimicrobial Efficacy of Sodium Hypochlorite and Chlorhexidine in Gutta-Percha Cone Decontamination: A Systematic Review. Materials 2025, 18, 1539. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma18071539
Aucinaite R, Nedzinskiene E, Peciuliene V, Dumbryte I. The Antimicrobial Efficacy of Sodium Hypochlorite and Chlorhexidine in Gutta-Percha Cone Decontamination: A Systematic Review. Materials. 2025; 18(7):1539. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma18071539
Chicago/Turabian StyleAucinaite, Ruta, Egle Nedzinskiene, Vytaute Peciuliene, and Irma Dumbryte. 2025. "The Antimicrobial Efficacy of Sodium Hypochlorite and Chlorhexidine in Gutta-Percha Cone Decontamination: A Systematic Review" Materials 18, no. 7: 1539. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma18071539
APA StyleAucinaite, R., Nedzinskiene, E., Peciuliene, V., & Dumbryte, I. (2025). The Antimicrobial Efficacy of Sodium Hypochlorite and Chlorhexidine in Gutta-Percha Cone Decontamination: A Systematic Review. Materials, 18(7), 1539. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma18071539