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

• 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
• ISSN: 0975-7406; 0976-4879; 0975-7406
• DOI: 10.4103/jpbs.jpbs_753_21

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.