Comparative evaluation of chlorhexidine and cetrimide as irrigants in necrotic primary teeth: An In vivo study

Context: Disinfection of the root canal system by biomechanical preparation and profuse irrigation is especially important in primary teeth due to its complex pulp canal anatomy. Appropriate selection of irrigating solution should be done in terms of tissue dissolving capacity, antibacterial efficac...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Journal of pharmacy & bioallied science 2022-07, Vol.14 (5), p.626-630
Main Authors: Sabu, Nimmy, Thomas, Nithya, Thimmaiah, Charisma, Joseph, Ajay, Jobe, Justin, Palose, Pauline
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Anaerobic bacteria
Analysis
Antibacterial agents
Chlorhexidine
Dental pulp
Disinfection
Lavage
Original
Palatability
Pediatrics
Povidone
Root canal therapy
Root canals
Statistical analysis
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Context: Disinfection of the root canal system by biomechanical preparation and profuse irrigation is especially important in primary teeth due to its complex pulp canal anatomy. Appropriate selection of irrigating solution should be done in terms of tissue dissolving capacity, antibacterial efficacy, and palatability when treating pediatric cases. Aim: The aim of the study was to compare the antibacterial efficacy of 2% chlorhexidine (CHX), 0.2% cetrimide (CTR), and 0.2% CHX + 0.2% CTR against anaerobic bacteria and to test the influence of CTR added to CHX on its antibacterial action. Materials and Methods: Seventy-five teeth that were selected for the study were divided into three groups: Group I (2% CHX), Group II (0.2% CTR), and Group III (0. 2% CHX + 0.2% CTR). Samples collected before and after irrigation were immediately processed and microbial growths were quantified. Statistical Analysis: Intergroup comparison was done using one-way analysis of variance and Newman-Keuls multiple post hoc procedures and intragroup comparison was done using paired t-test. Results: When the mean values of Group I were compared with Group II, the data were statistically not significant (P = 0.2341), whereas Group I showed a significant difference when compared with Group III (P = 0.0107). When the mean values of Group II and Group III were compared, the data were found to be statistically not significant (P = 0.0805). Conclusion: The efficacy of 2% CHX was found to be slightly superior when compared with that of 0.2% CTR, but the difference was not statistically significant. However, a significant difference was found between 2% CHX and combination irrigants.
ISSN:0975-7406
0976-4879
0975-7406
DOI:10.4103/jpbs.jpbs_753_21