• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

EndoSeal MTA、iRoot SP和AH Plus对浮游细菌的抗菌活性评估。

Evaluation of the Antibacterial Activity of EndoSeal MTA, iRoot SP, and AH Plus against Planktonic Bacteria.

作者信息

Mak Siew Thong, Leong Xin Fang, Tew In Meei, Kumolosasi Endang, Wong Lishen

机构信息

Department of Restorative Dentistry, Faculty of Dentistry, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, Kuala Lumpur 50300, Malaysia.

Department of Craniofacial Diagnostics and Biosciences, Faculty of Dentistry, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, Kuala Lumpur 50300, Malaysia.

出版信息

Materials (Basel). 2022 Mar 8;15(6):2012. doi: 10.3390/ma15062012.

DOI:10.3390/ma15062012
PMID:35329464
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8950277/
Abstract

This study aimed to investigate the antibacterial activity of three endodontic sealers, AH Plus, iRoot SP, and EndoSeal MTA, against four planktonic bacteria species. The antibacterial activity of the three endodontic sealers was assessed using a modified direct contact test. Bacteria suspension of , , and were left in contact with the sealers that were pre-set or set for 1, 3, 7, and l4 days for an hour. Freshly mixed AH Plus and EndoSeal MTA were highly effective against all four tested bacteria as no surviving bacteria were recovered after treatment. Meanwhile, freshly mixed iRoot SP was not able to kill all bacteria, regardless of the species, demonstrating a weak antibacterial effect. After 24 h, AH Plus lost its antibacterial activity. EndoSeal MTA showed a strong and extended bactericidal effect against and for 3 days and for 7 days. In conclusion, fresh AH Plus and EndoSeal MTA exhibited a potent effect against all four bacteria species. EndoSeal MTA remained effective after setting when tested against , and . Among all tested sealers, iRoot SP demonstrates the weakest antibacterial activity.

摘要

本研究旨在调查三种根管封闭剂AH Plus、iRoot SP和EndoSeal MTA对四种浮游细菌的抗菌活性。采用改良的直接接触试验评估这三种根管封闭剂的抗菌活性。将金黄色葡萄球菌、大肠杆菌、粪肠球菌和白色念珠菌的细菌悬液与预先设定或设定1、3、7和14天的封闭剂接触1小时。新鲜混合的AH Plus和EndoSeal MTA对所有四种受试细菌都非常有效,因为处理后未检测到存活细菌。同时,无论细菌种类如何,新鲜混合的iRoot SP都不能杀死所有细菌,显示出较弱的抗菌效果。24小时后,AH Plus失去了抗菌活性。EndoSeal MTA对金黄色葡萄球菌和大肠杆菌显示出强烈且持久的杀菌作用,持续3天,对粪肠球菌持续7天。总之,新鲜的AH Plus和EndoSeal MTA对所有四种细菌都有强效作用。EndoSeal MTA在凝固后对金黄色葡萄球菌、大肠杆菌和粪肠球菌进行测试时仍然有效。在所有测试的封闭剂中,iRoot SP的抗菌活性最弱。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/4372/8950277/af686a9ebbe2/materials-15-02012-g005.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/4372/8950277/c1c7358ea163/materials-15-02012-g001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/4372/8950277/45b7bf5bba46/materials-15-02012-g002.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/4372/8950277/2efc1862e1ff/materials-15-02012-g003.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/4372/8950277/7e8a13becefd/materials-15-02012-g004.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/4372/8950277/af686a9ebbe2/materials-15-02012-g005.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/4372/8950277/c1c7358ea163/materials-15-02012-g001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/4372/8950277/45b7bf5bba46/materials-15-02012-g002.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/4372/8950277/2efc1862e1ff/materials-15-02012-g003.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/4372/8950277/7e8a13becefd/materials-15-02012-g004.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/4372/8950277/af686a9ebbe2/materials-15-02012-g005.jpg

相似文献

1
Evaluation of the Antibacterial Activity of EndoSeal MTA, iRoot SP, and AH Plus against Planktonic Bacteria.EndoSeal MTA、iRoot SP和AH Plus对浮游细菌的抗菌活性评估。
Materials (Basel). 2022 Mar 8;15(6):2012. doi: 10.3390/ma15062012.
2
Antibacterial Activity of Endodontic Sealers against Planktonic Bacteria and Bacteria in Biofilms.根管封闭剂对浮游菌和生物膜细菌的抗菌活性。
J Endod. 2018 Jan;44(1):149-154. doi: 10.1016/j.joen.2017.08.023. Epub 2017 Nov 15.
3
Antibacterial activity of endodontic sealers by modified direct contact test against Enterococcus faecalis.通过改良直接接触试验检测根管封闭剂对粪肠球菌的抗菌活性。
J Endod. 2009 Jul;35(7):1051-5. doi: 10.1016/j.joen.2009.04.022.
4
An Invitro Evaluation of Antimicrobial Efficacy and Flow Characteristics for AH Plus, MTA Fillapex, CRCS and Gutta Flow 2 Root Canal Sealer.AH Plus、MTA Fillapex、CRCS和Gutta Flow 2根管封闭剂抗菌效果及流动性的体外评估
J Clin Diagn Res. 2016 Aug;10(8):ZC104-8. doi: 10.7860/JCDR/2016/20885.8351. Epub 2016 Aug 1.
5
Antibacterial Activity of MTA Fillapex and AH 26 Root Canal Sealers at Different Time Intervals.MTA Fillapex和AH 26根管封闭剂在不同时间间隔的抗菌活性
Iran Endod J. 2016 Summer;11(3):192-7. doi: 10.7508/iej.2016.03.009. Epub 2016 May 1.
6
The in vitro antimicrobial activities of four endodontic sealers.四种根管封闭剂的体外抗菌活性。
BMC Oral Health. 2019 Jun 18;19(1):118. doi: 10.1186/s12903-019-0817-2.
7
Antibacterial activity of different root canal sealers against .不同根管封闭剂对……的抗菌活性
J Clin Exp Dent. 2017 Jun 1;9(6):e743-e748. doi: 10.4317/jced.53753. eCollection 2017 Jun.
8
Comparison of Obturation Quality between Calcium Silicate-Based Sealers and Resin-Based Sealers for Endodontic Re-treatment.基于硅酸钙的封闭剂与基于树脂的封闭剂用于根管再治疗时封闭质量的比较
Materials (Basel). 2021 Dec 23;15(1):72. doi: 10.3390/ma15010072.
9
Biocompatibility and Mineralization Activity of Three Calcium Silicate-Based Root Canal Sealers Compared to Conventional Resin-Based Sealer in Human Dental Pulp Stem Cells.与传统树脂基封闭剂相比,三种硅酸钙基根管封闭剂在人牙髓干细胞中的生物相容性和矿化活性
Materials (Basel). 2019 Aug 5;12(15):2482. doi: 10.3390/ma12152482.
10
Physicochemical Properties of Epoxy Resin-Based and Bioceramic-Based Root Canal Sealers.基于环氧树脂和生物陶瓷的根管封闭剂的物理化学性质
Bioinorg Chem Appl. 2017;2017:2582849. doi: 10.1155/2017/2582849. Epub 2017 Jan 22.

引用本文的文献

1
Effect of ultrasonic-assisted iRoot SP single-cone technique on root canal filling efficacy: an in vitro study.超声辅助iRoot SP单尖法对根管充填效果的影响:一项体外研究
Am J Transl Res. 2025 Jun 15;17(6):4375-4386. doi: 10.62347/WAIK7340. eCollection 2025.
2
In Vitro Antimicrobial Effects of Endoseal MTA and AH Plus Sealers on and Mature Biofilms.Endoseal MTA和AH Plus封闭剂对早期和成熟生物膜的体外抗菌作用
Front Dent. 2025 May 19;22:19. doi: 10.18502/fid.v22i19.18760. eCollection 2025.
3
Evaluating the penetration, interfacial adaptation, and push-out bond strength of four bioceramic-based root canal sealers.

本文引用的文献

1
Bactericidal Effect of a Novel Alkaline EDTA Root Canal Cleaning Solution.新型碱性乙二胺四乙酸根管冲洗液的杀菌作用
Eur J Dent. 2021 Jul;15(3):546-550. doi: 10.1055/s-0041-1723067. Epub 2021 Mar 10.
2
The minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) and minimum bactericidal concentration (MBC) of silver nanoparticles against .银纳米颗粒对……的最低抑菌浓度(MIC)和最低杀菌浓度(MBC)
Biomater Investig Dent. 2020 Jul 23;7(1):105-109. doi: 10.1080/26415275.2020.1796674.
3
Phenotypic and Genotypic Characterization of Streptococcus mutans Strains Isolated from Endodontic Infections.
评估四种生物陶瓷基根管封闭剂的渗透性能、界面适应性和推出粘结强度。
BMC Oral Health. 2025 May 21;25(1):748. doi: 10.1186/s12903-025-06124-w.
4
Comparative Evaluation of the Antimicrobial Efficacy of Endodontic Sealers Against Staphylococcus aureus and Streptococcus mutans: An In Vitro Study.根管封闭剂对金黄色葡萄球菌和变形链球菌抗菌效果的比较评价:一项体外研究
Cureus. 2025 Mar 11;17(3):e80435. doi: 10.7759/cureus.80435. eCollection 2025 Mar.
5
In vitro comparison of Enterococcus Faecalis survival in dentinal tubules following root canal therapy with AH plus, endoseal MTA, and cold ceramic sealers.根管治疗后使用AH plus、Endoseal MTA和冷陶瓷封闭剂时粪肠球菌在牙本质小管内存活情况的体外比较
BMC Oral Health. 2024 Dec 18;24(1):1488. doi: 10.1186/s12903-024-05192-8.
6
The effect of AH26, Endoseal and ZOE sealers on Candida albicans and Enterococcus faecalis.AH26、Endoseal和氧化锌丁香油水门汀封闭剂对白色念珠菌和粪肠球菌的影响。
GMS Hyg Infect Control. 2024 Oct 23;19:Doc50. doi: 10.3205/dgkh000505. eCollection 2024.
7
Evaluation of the antibacterial and cytotoxic properties of TotalFill and NeoSEALER flo bioceramic sealers.TotalFill和NeoSEALER流动型生物陶瓷封闭剂的抗菌和细胞毒性特性评估
J Conserv Dent Endod. 2024 May;27(5):491-497. doi: 10.4103/JCDE.JCDE_103_24. Epub 2024 May 10.
8
Sol-Gel Technologies to Obtain Advanced Bioceramics for Dental Therapeutics.溶胶-凝胶技术获取用于牙科治疗的先进生物陶瓷。
Molecules. 2023 Oct 7;28(19):6967. doi: 10.3390/molecules28196967.
9
assessment of antibacterial activity in four endodontic sealers against and using agar diffusion test.采用琼脂扩散试验评估四种根管封闭剂对 和 的抗菌活性。
J Med Life. 2023 Apr;16(4):610-615. doi: 10.25122/jml-2022-0337.
从根管感染中分离的变形链球菌的表型和基因型特征。
J Endod. 2020 Dec;46(12):1876-1883. doi: 10.1016/j.joen.2020.09.002. Epub 2020 Sep 11.
4
Apical root canal cleaning after preparation with endodontic instruments: a randomized trial analysis.根管预备后根尖根管的清理:一项随机试验分析
Restor Dent Endod. 2020 Jun 24;45(3):e38. doi: 10.5395/rde.2020.45.e38. eCollection 2020 Aug.
5
The Influence of Enterococcus faecalis as a Dental Root Canal Pathogen on Endodontic Treatment: A Systematic Review.粪肠球菌作为牙根管病原体对根管治疗的影响:一项系统评价
Cureus. 2020 Mar 13;12(3):e7257. doi: 10.7759/cureus.7257.
6
Comprehensive review of current endodontic sealers.当前根管封闭剂的综合评述。
Dent Mater J. 2020 Sep 29;39(5):703-720. doi: 10.4012/dmj.2019-288. Epub 2020 Mar 24.
7
Dentinal tubule penetration and root canal cleanliness following ultrasonic activation of intracanal-heated sodium hypochlorite.根管内加热次氯酸钠超声激活后的牙本质小管渗透及根管清洁情况
Aust Endod J. 2020 Aug;46(2):204-209. doi: 10.1111/aej.12393. Epub 2019 Dec 17.
8
[Antibacterial effectiveness of calcium silicate-based root canal sealer against biofilms in infected dentinal tubules ].硅酸钙基根管封闭剂对感染牙本质小管内生物膜的抗菌效果
Zhonghua Kou Qiang Yi Xue Za Zhi. 2019 Oct 9;54(10):656-661. doi: 10.3760/cma.j.issn.1002-0098.2019.10.002.
9
The in vitro antimicrobial activities of four endodontic sealers.四种根管封闭剂的体外抗菌活性。
BMC Oral Health. 2019 Jun 18;19(1):118. doi: 10.1186/s12903-019-0817-2.
10
Bioactive tri/dicalcium silicate cements for treatment of pulpal and periapical tissues.用于治疗牙髓和根尖周组织的生物活性三/二硅酸钙水泥。
Acta Biomater. 2019 Sep 15;96:35-54. doi: 10.1016/j.actbio.2019.05.050. Epub 2019 May 27.