两种根管封闭剂对不同菌株的抗真菌活性。 （你提供的原文似乎不完整，结尾处有省略内容）
Antifungal Activity of Two Root Canal Sealers against Different Strains of .
作者信息
Jafari Farnaz, Jafari Sanaz, Samadi Kafil Hossein, Momeni Tahereh, Jamloo Helen
机构信息
Department of Endodontics, Dental School, Tabriz University of Medical Sciences, Tabriz, Iran.
Department of Orthodontics, Dental School, Ilam University of Medical Sciences, Ilam, Iran.
出版信息
Iran Endod J. 2017 Winter;12(1):98-102. doi: 10.22037/iej.2017.20.
INTRODUCTION
Microorganisms and microbial products are the main etiologic factors in pulp and periapical diseases. The present study aimed to compare the antifungal activity of two different sealers, AH-26 and MTA Fillapex against three strains of 24, 48, 72 h and 7 days after mixing.
METHODS AND MATERIALS
The microorganisms used in this study were ATCC 10231) (ATCC 90030) and (DSM 70079). This test was based on growth of microorganisms and turbidity measurement technique using a spectrophotometer. The direct contact test was conducted by direct and indirect methods. Multiple comparisons were carried out using analysis of variances (ANOVA) with repeated measures followed by Tukey's tests.
RESULTS
The antifungal activity of both sealers was similar in the indirect method. The antifungal activity of both sealers in the direct method was similar against and higher for AH-26 sealer against and .
CONCLUSION
The total antifungal effect of MTA Fillapex sealer was significantly less than AH-26 sealer in direct method. The antifungal effect of both sealers was similar in indirect method.
引言
微生物及微生物产物是牙髓病和根尖周病的主要病因。本研究旨在比较两种不同的封闭剂AH - 26和MTA Fillapex在混合后24小时、48小时、72小时和7天对三种菌株的抗真菌活性。
方法和材料
本研究中使用的微生物为ATCC 10231、ATCC 90030和DSM 70079。该试验基于微生物的生长情况，并采用分光光度计通过比浊法进行测量。直接接触试验通过直接和间接方法进行。采用重复测量方差分析（ANOVA）并随后进行Tukey检验进行多重比较。
结果
在间接方法中，两种封闭剂的抗真菌活性相似。在直接方法中，两种封闭剂对[具体菌株1]的抗真菌活性相似，而AH - 26封闭剂对[具体菌株2]和[具体菌株3]的抗真菌活性更高。
结论
在直接方法中，MTA Fillapex封闭剂的总抗真菌效果明显低于AH - 26封闭剂。在间接方法中，两种封闭剂的抗真菌效果相似。
Zotero 插件