Comparación entre Clorhexidina e Hipoclorito de sodio como soluciones desinfectantes en la práctica Endodóntica

Autores/as

  • Cesar Andrade
  • David Bustamante
  • Osmani Guevara
  • Ana Armas

Palabras clave:

Chlorhexidine, sodium hypochlorite, endodontics

Resumen

El éxito de los tratamientos endodónticos depende tanto de una buena conformación de los conductos radiculares como de la correcta desinfección del espacio pulpar ya que los organismos que habitan en las paredes de los conductos radiculares pueden sobrevivir como monocultivos por lo que es indispensable además de la eliminación mecánica de los lipopolisacáridos es uso de irrigantes como el hipoclorito de sodio que es uno de los irrigantes más utilizados para la desinfección de los conductos radiculares ya que nos permite disolver tejidos orgánicos además de su fuerte actividad antimicrobiana, la clorhexidina que tiene características biocompatibles además de dos características útiles al momento de la desinfección de los conductos radiculares como los son la sustentabilidad y su acción antimicrobiana o el ácido etilendiaminotetraacetico (EDTA) que presenta características quelantes que nos permite la eliminación de la capa de frotis o barrillo dentinario producto de la instrumentación

Descargas

Los datos de descarga aún no están disponibles.

Referencias

Liu Y, Guo L, Li Y, Guo X, Wang B, Wu L. In vitro comparison of antimicrobial effectiveness of QMix and other final irrigants in human root canals. Sci Rep. 2015; 5: 17823.

Samiei M, Shahi S,Ardalan-Abdollahi A, Eskandarinezhad M, Negahdari R, Pakseresht Z. The Antibacterial Efficacy of Photo-Activated Disinfection, Chlorhexidine and Sodium Hypochlorite in Infected Root Canals: An in vitro study. Iran Endod J. 2016; 11(3):179–183.

Rico-Romano C,Zubizarreta-Macho A, BaqueroArtigao M, Mena-Álvarez J. An analysis in vivo of intracanal bacterial load before and after chemomechanical preparation: A comparative analysis of two irrigants and two activation techniques. J ClinExp Dent. 2016;8(1):e9–e13.

Karale R, Odebra KM, Srirekhaet A, Champa C, Shetty A, Pushpalathaet al.Effect of dentin on the antimicrobial efficacy of 3% sodium hypochlorite, 2% chlorhexidine, 17% ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid, and 18% etidronic acid on Candida albicans: An in vitro study. J Conserv Dent. 2016;19:455-60. doi: 10.4103/0972-0707.190023.

Luddin N, Ahmed HMA. The antibacterial activity of sodium hypochlorite and chlorhexidine against Enterococcus faecalis: A review on agar diffusion and direct contact methods. J Conservative Dentistry. 2013; 16(1):9-16.

Da Silva EJNL, Monteiro MR, Belladonna FG, Almeida JF, De-Deus G, Neves AA. Postoperative Pain after Foraminal Instrumentation with a Reciprocating System and Different Irrigating Solutions. Braz Dent J. 2015; 26(3): 216-221.

Valera MC, Cardoso FGR, Chung A, Xavier ACC, Figueiredo MD, Martinho FC, Palo RM. Comparison of Different Irrigants in the Removal of Endotoxins and Cultivable Microorganisms from Infected Root Canals. The Scientific world Journal 2015. Article ID 125636: 1- 6

Gonçalves LS, Rodrigues RCV, Andrade Junior CV, Soares RG, Vettore MV. The Effect of Sodium Hypochlorite and Chlorhexidine as Irrigant Solutions for Root Canal Disinfection: A Systematic Review of Clinical Trials. Journal of Endodontics 2016. 42 (4):527-532.

Shenoy A, Bolla N, Sayish, Sarath RK, Sunil-Ram CH, Sumlatha. Assessment of precipitate formation on interaction of irrigants used in different combinations: an in vitro study. Indian J Dent Res. 2013; 24:451-455. doi: 10.4103/0970-9290.118392.

Krishnamma S, Peedikayil F, Aman S, Tomy N, Pulickal-Mariodan J. Comparative Evaluation of Antimicrobial Activity of QMiX, 2.5% Sodium Hypochlorite, 2% Chlorhexidine, Guava Leaf Extract and Aloevera Extract Against Enterococcus faecalis and Candida albicans – An in-vitro Study. J ClinDiagn Res. 2016; 10 (5):ZC20–ZC23.

Goztas Z, Onat H, Tosun G, Sener Y, Huseyin H. Antimicrobial effect of ozonated water, sodium hypochlorite and chlorhexidinegluconate in primary molar root canals. Eur J Dent. 2014;8(4):469–474.

Ashofteh K, Sohrabi K, Iranparvar K, Chiniforush N. In vitro comparison of the antibacterial effect of three intracanalirrigants and diode laser on root canals infected with Enterococcus faecalis. Iran J Microbiol. 2014; 6(1):26–30.

Elakanti S, Cherukuri G, Rao V, Chandrasekhar V, Rao A, Tummala M. Comparative evaluation of antimicrobial efficacy of QMix™ 2 in 1, sodium hypochlorite, and chlorhexidine against Enterococcus faecalis and Candida albicans. J Conserv Dent. 2015; 18(2):128–131.

Vaziri S, Kangarlou A, Shahbazi R, Nazari-Nasab A, Naseri M. Comparison of the bactericidal efficacy of photodynamic therapy, 2.5% sodium hypochlorite, and 2% chlorhexidine against Enterococcousfaecalis in root canals; an in vitro study. Dent Res J. 2012; 9(5):613–618.

Mollashahi NF, Bokaeian M, Mollashahir LF, Afrougheh A. Antifungal Efficacy of Green Tea Extract against Candida Albicans Biofilm on Tooth Substrate. J Dentistry, Tehran University of Medical Sciences2015; 12(8):592-598.

Karale R, Odedra KM, Srirekha A, Champa C, Shetty A, Pushpalatha S, et al.Effect of dentin on the antimicrobial efficacy of 3% sodium hypochlorite, 2% chlorhexidine, 17% ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid, and 18% etidronic acid on Candida albicans: An in vitro study. J Conserv Dent. 2016; 19(5):455-60. doi: 10.4103/0972-0707.190023.

Rôças IN, Provenzano JC, Neves MA, Siqueira JF Jr. Disinfecting Effects of Rotary Instrumentation with Either 2.5% Sodium Hypochlorite or 2% Chlorhexidine as the Main Irrigant: A Randomized Clinical Study. J Endod. 2016 Jun; 42(6):943-7. doi: 10.1016

Samiei M, Shahi S, Abdollahi AA, Eskandarinezhad M, Negahdari R, Pakseresht Z. La Eficacia antibacteriana de Activado-Foto Desinfección, clorhexidina y el hipoclorito de sodio en infectados Tratamientos de conducto: Estudio in vitro. Irán Endod J. 2016;11(3):179-83.

Agrawal V, Rao MR, Dhingra K, Gopal VR, Mohapatra A, Mohapatra A. Una comparación in vitro de effcacy antimicrobiana de tres irrigantes- Biopure conducto radicular MTAD, 2% de clorhexidina gluconato y 5,25% de hipoclorito de sodio como un enjuague final contra E. faecalis.J ContempDentPract. 2013; 14(5):842-7.

Ercan E, Ozekinci T, atakul F, Gül K.La actividad antibacteriana de 2% de clorhexidina gluconato y 5,25% de hipoclorito de sodio en canal de la raíz infectada: estudio in vivo. J Endod. 2004; 30(2):84-7.

Magro, MG, Kuga MC, Aranda- Garcia AJ, ChávezAndrade GM, Faria G, Keine KC, Só VR. Effectiveness of several solutions to prevent the formation of precipitate due to the interaction between sodium hypochlorite and chlorhexidine and its effect on bond strebht of an epoxy- based sealer. International Endodontics Journal, 2014 pg. 1- 6.

Kolosowski KP, Sodhi RNS, Anil Kisken, Basrani BR. Qualitative analysis of precipitate formation on the surface and in the tubules of dentin irrigated with sodium hypochlorite and a final rinse of chlorhexidine or QMIX. JOE. 2014. 40(12):2036-2040.

Orban EO, Irmak O, Hur D, Yaman BC, Karabucak B. Does para-chloroaniline really form after mixing sodium hypochlorite and chlorhexidine? JOE. 2016, 42(3): 455- 459

Descargas

Publicado

2017-01-01

Número

Sección

Artículos de revisión / Reviews

Cómo citar

Comparación entre Clorhexidina e Hipoclorito de sodio como soluciones desinfectantes en la práctica Endodóntica. (2017). Revista KIRU ISSN (Impreso): 1812 - 7886 ISSN (Digital): 2410-2717, 14(1). https://portalrevistas.aulavirtualusmp.pe/index.php/Rev-Kiru0/article/view/1251