Health Sciences Faculty, University Fernando Pessoa, Porto, Portugal.
Health Sciences Faculty, University Fernando Pessoa, Porto; FP-ENAS - UFP Energy, Environment and Health Research Unit, University Fernando Pessoa, Porto; LAQV, REQUIMTE, University of Porto, Porto, Portugal.
Eur Endod J. 2020 Dec;5(3):282-287. doi: 10.14744/eej.2020.44265.
To evaluate the bacterial contamination of different brands of Gutta-Percha (GP) points routinely used in clinical practice and the efficacy of a chairside disinfection protocol with sodium hypochlorite.
GP points (n=240), in sizes A, B, C, D, K15, K20, K25, K30, K35, K40, F1, F2, F3 (Dentsply®, Proclinic®, ProTaper® and R&S®), were randomly sampled from commercial packages already in use. These were added directly to Fluid Thioglycolate Medium (one GP point per tube) and incubated at 37ºC for 21 days. During this period, the presence/absence of turbidity was evaluated. To evaluate the efficacy of a chairside disinfection protocol, all detected contaminated GP points were immersed for 1 minute in 10 mL of 5.25% sodium hypochlorite, followed by 5 minutes in 10 mL of detergent solution (3% Tween 80 and 5% sodium thiosulfate) and a final rinse with 10 mL of sterile distilled water and incubated. The data was analysed using the chi-square test and differences between characteristics of dichotomic variables were performed using the binomial test. The significance level was set at P<0.05.
Bacterial growth was observed in 22.9% of the total study samples. Dentsply® and R&S® showed the highest level of contamination, 47.3% each, although without significant differences to the other commercial brands. The most contaminated GP point size was K30 (16.4%). The chairside disinfection protocol was effective in disinfection of 76.4% of GP points (P<0.001).
A real small number of GP points in clinical use harboured bacteria, including after the Chairside Disinfection Protocol that, anyway, proved to be effective. No significant difference was observed between tested commercial brands.
评估临床上常规使用的不同品牌牙胶尖的细菌污染情况，并评估次氯酸钠椅旁消毒方案的效果。
从已使用的商业包装中随机抽取 A、B、C、D、K15、K20、K25、K30、K35、K40、F1、F2、F3（Dentsply®、Proclinic®、ProTaper®和 R&S®）等不同尺寸的牙胶尖（n=240）。将这些牙胶尖直接加入流体巯基乙酸盐培养基（每管 1 个牙胶尖）中，在 37°C 下孵育 21 天。在此期间，评估是否有浊度。为了评估椅旁消毒方案的效果，将所有检测到的污染牙胶尖浸入 10mL5.25%次氯酸钠中 1 分钟，然后在 10mL 清洁剂溶液（3%吐温 80 和 5%硫代硫酸钠）中浸泡 5 分钟，最后用 10mL 无菌蒸馏水冲洗并孵育。使用卡方检验分析数据，使用二项式检验分析二分类变量的特征差异。显著性水平设为 P<0.05。
总研究样本中有 22.9%观察到细菌生长。Dentsply®和 R&S®的污染程度最高，均为 47.3%，但与其他商业品牌无显著差异。污染最严重的牙胶尖尺寸为 K30（16.4%）。椅旁消毒方案对 76.4%的牙胶尖消毒有效（P<0.001）。
临床上使用的牙胶尖中确实有少量细菌存在，即使经过椅旁消毒方案处理，也能有效清除细菌。测试的商业品牌之间未观察到显著差异。
