Suppr超能文献

使用纸片扩散法对草药牙膏、顺势疗法牙膏和传统牙膏对口腔微生物群的抗菌活性进行比较评估:一项体外研究。

Comparative Evaluation of Anti-microbial Activity of Herbal, Homeopathic, and Conventional Dentifrices Against Oral Microflora Using the Disc Diffusion Method: An In Vitro Study.

作者信息

K Manoj, S Dharani, P Shakthivel, S Divyasharan, B Shalini, G Nandhinidevi, Agarwal Ritu, G Gayathri, R Sobana

机构信息

Pediatric Dentistry, Priyadarshini Dental College and Hospital, Thiruvallur, IND.

General Dentistry, Shrivatsa Dental Clinic, Sholingur, IND.

出版信息

Cureus. 2024 Jun 11;16(6):e62197. doi: 10.7759/cureus.62197. eCollection 2024 Jun.

Abstract

Aim To assess the antimicrobial activity of herbal, homeopathic, and conventional dentifrices against oral microorganisms. Methodology Mueller Hilton agar was used to cultivate distinct strains of and , whereas was cultured on a potato dextrose agar medium. Diffusion ratios of 1:5, 1:10, and 1:15 were obtained by diluting 1 gram of each dentifrice (KP Namboodiri, Homeodent, andColgate Strong Teeth) in 4 ml, 9 ml, and 14 ml of distilled water, respectively. The culture medium was filled with sterile discs. Twenty μl of each dilution of prepared dentifrice formulations were incorporated using a micropipette. The agar plates were incubated for 24 hours at 37ºC. Result The findings indicate that there was a higher zone of inhibition against with herbal dentifrice at 10 mm, 8 mm, and 6.5 mm, followed by conventional dentifrice at 10 mm, 7.5 mm, and 7 mm, and the lowest with homeopathic dentifrice at 8 mm, 7 mm, and 7 mm at 1:5, 1:10 and 1:15 dilutions, respectively. Conventional dentifrice was found to inhibit at 9 mm, 8 mm, and 7 mm with 1:5, 1:10, and 1:15 dilutions followed by herbal dentifrice at 9 mm, 7 mm with 1:5, 1:10 dilutions, and no inhibition at 1:15 dilution. In contrast, homeopathic dentifrice displayed no inhibition at 1:5, 1:10, and 1:15 dilutions. Neither homeopathic nor conventional dentifrices inhibited , but herbal dentifrices showed a 10 mm zone of inhibition at 1:10 dilution. Conclusion Conventional and herbal dentifrices were found to be more effective against than the homeopathic dentifrice used in the study, whereas herbal dentifrice was more effective againstwhen compared to conventional and homeopathic dentifrices.

摘要

目的 评估草药牙膏、顺势疗法牙膏和传统牙膏对口腔微生物的抗菌活性。方法 使用穆勒-希尔顿琼脂培养不同的 和 菌株,而 在马铃薯葡萄糖琼脂培养基上培养。通过将1克每种牙膏(KP Namboodiri、Homeodent和高露洁坚固牙齿牙膏)分别在4毫升、9毫升和14毫升蒸馏水中稀释,得到1:5、1:10和1:15的稀释比例。培养基中填充无菌圆盘。使用微量移液器加入20微升每种制备好的牙膏制剂稀释液。琼脂平板在37℃下孵育24小时。结果 研究结果表明,在1:5、1:10和1:15稀释度下,草药牙膏对 的抑菌圈分别为10毫米、8毫米和6.5毫米,其次是传统牙膏,分别为10毫米、7.5毫米和7毫米,顺势疗法牙膏最低,分别为8毫米、7毫米和7毫米。传统牙膏在1:5、1:10和1:15稀释度下对 的抑菌圈分别为9毫米、8毫米和7毫米,其次是草药牙膏,在1:5、1:10稀释度下分别为9毫米、7毫米,在1:15稀释度下无抑菌作用。相比之下,顺势疗法牙膏在1:5、1:10和1:15稀释度下均无抑菌作用。顺势疗法牙膏和传统牙膏均未抑制 ,但草药牙膏在1:10稀释度下显示出10毫米的抑菌圈。结论 研究发现,传统牙膏和草药牙膏对 的抗菌效果比顺势疗法牙膏更有效,而草药牙膏在对抗 方面比传统牙膏和顺势疗法牙膏更有效。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/dc5f/11239960/3e8e25b3e008/cureus-0016-00000062197-i01.jpg

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验