الفهرس 
Review of LiteratureOnly 14 pages are availabe for public view
 |  | from | 16 |  |  |
| | | from | 16 | | |
Abstract
It was aimed to evaluate the effect of QMixTM2in1 in comparison withsodium hypochlorite irrigating solution againstEnterococcus faecalisusing different irrigation systems namely: Passive irrigation, ultrasonic activation and sonic activation.In the present study 70 freshly extracted human single rooted teeth were collected. The crowns of all teeth were resected and the total length of each root was standardized to be 16 mm.
The root canals were prepared using Protaper Universal NiTi rotary file system in a crown down technique. Enterococcus Faecalisbacterial suspension in Trypticase soy broth was applied into the canal of each root. The coronal access were sealed with pink wax andincubated at 37oC for seven days.
65 Teeth were randomly divided into 3 experimental groups of 20 teeth each according to the technique used during irrigation protocol and a control group of 5 teeth without irrigation. Group A: irrigation was done using Max-I-Probe needle, Group B: irrigation was activated using Endoactivator with red 25 /.04 tip, Group C: activation was done using ultrasonic device with irrisafe 25/21mm ultrasonic tip. Each group was subdivided into two sub-groups according to the type of irrigant. The first sub-group was irrigated using 2.5% NaOCl. For the second sub-group QMixTM2in1was used. Each group is irrigated with a total volume of 3ml for 1 minute divided into 3 successive cycles 20 seconds each to ensure irrigant replenishment inside the canal.
Samples were divided into four time intervals; S1 sample was taken immediately after infection of the teeth, S2 sample was taken immediately after irrigation, S3 sample was taken after 3 days incubation period after irrigation of the teeth, S4 sample was taken after 10 days from the infection of the teeth to test the prolonged antibacterial action of the irrigant used.The method of evaluation of antimicrobial activity used was direct counting of colony forming units (CFUs) after irrigation with final flush.
The results regarding the antibacterial effect of both of the testing solutions with different agitation protocols came with increase in the bacterial count reduction with no statistical difference between QMixTM2in1 and 2.5% NaOCl after 3days period from the irrigation procedures.The effect of QMixTM2in1 increased over 2.5% NaOCl after 10 days of incubation period of microorganisms from the irrigation procedures.No significant difference was found between the three techniques.There wasn’t any difference between the three agitation techniques on the antibacterial activity of both irrigants used.
The conclusions of the present study were:
1) QMixTM2in1 irrigating solution was found to be promising in respect of inhibiting the growth of Enterococcus faecalis.
2) QMixTM2in1 irrigating solution proved antimicrobial efficacy in short and prolonged duration against Enterococcus faecalis.
3) The antimicrobial efficiency of sodium hypochlorite can be improved using full concentration.
4) Different agitation techniques have no effect on the antimicrobial efficacy.
Recommendations:
1) Further studies concerning the antibacterial efficacy of QMixTM2in1using different endodontic microbes are encouraged in order to know its effect against different organisms.
2) Further in vitro and vivo studies to evaluate the effect of cleaning and shaping procedures in conjunction with different irrigation protocols on the eradication of bacteria from root canal using QMixTM2in1.