Scholarlink

Objectives <p>Comparison between different disinfection modalities in reducing <i>Streptococcus mutans</i> count within dental cavities. Research question: whether using an antibacterial agent has a value in reducing the bacterial load in the dental cavity and what is the best modality.</p> <p>Cariogenic bacteria can remain viable in the dentine even after complete removal of caries, so the use of cavity disinfectants before restoration placement is crucial, such as chlorohexidine, Er:YAG and Diode laser 980 nm. The aim of this study was to evaluate and compare the antibacterial effect of chlorohexidine, Er:YAG and diode laser 980 nm as cavity disinfectants.</p> Methods <p>Forty sound extracted human primary molars were randomly assigned to four groups (ten teeth in each group); group I: (negative control): no disinfection was applied, group II: (positive control): application of 2% chlorhexidine gluconate solution, group III: a 980&#xa0;nm diode laser (LASOTRONIX, Poland) was used at 1 W in continuous wave mode, and group IV: an Er:YAG laser was used at a, power 1.2 W. The antibacterial efficacy against <i>Streptococcus mutans</i> bacteria was assessed via colony forming units (CFU) and optical density of bacteria before treatment and after treatment.</p> Results <p>A statistically significant increase in bacterial count was observed in the negative control group (Gp1). Treatment groups 2, 3, and 4 showed a significant reduction in bacterial count from baseline to post-treatment.Er:YAG group showed the highest percentage of reduction of bacterial count with a statistically significant difference with other groups. No statistically significant difference was shown between chlorohexidine and diode laser groups.</p> Conclusions <p>The Er:YAG laser demonstrated the highest antibacterial efficacy against <i>Streptococcus mutans</i> when compared with chlorhexidine and the diode laser (980&#xa0;nm). Although all three disinfection methods showed significant antibacterial activity.</p> <p><i>Clinical relevance</i>: The superior antibacterial performance of the Er:YAG laser supports its use in clinical practice for managing deep carious lesions. These findings highlight the importance of thorough cavity disinfection before restoration placement to minimize bacterial persistence and reduce the risk of secondary caries. Clinical trial number: not applicable.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

The antibacterial effect of chlorohexidine, Er:YAG laser and diode laser 980 nm as dental cavity disinfectants of dentine: an in vitro study

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2025年12月29日

查看全文
  • Mennatallah Khafagi,
  • Mostafa Gheith,
  • Haythem S. Moharrum,
  • Mohamed Abo Elyazeed Ahmed,
  • Riham M. Aly,
  • Ahmed A. Hamed,
  • Maryam El Mansy

摘要

Objectives

Comparison between different disinfection modalities in reducing Streptococcus mutans count within dental cavities. Research question: whether using an antibacterial agent has a value in reducing the bacterial load in the dental cavity and what is the best modality.

Cariogenic bacteria can remain viable in the dentine even after complete removal of caries, so the use of cavity disinfectants before restoration placement is crucial, such as chlorohexidine, Er:YAG and Diode laser 980 nm. The aim of this study was to evaluate and compare the antibacterial effect of chlorohexidine, Er:YAG and diode laser 980 nm as cavity disinfectants.

Methods

Forty sound extracted human primary molars were randomly assigned to four groups (ten teeth in each group); group I: (negative control): no disinfection was applied, group II: (positive control): application of 2% chlorhexidine gluconate solution, group III: a 980 nm diode laser (LASOTRONIX, Poland) was used at 1 W in continuous wave mode, and group IV: an Er:YAG laser was used at a, power 1.2 W. The antibacterial efficacy against Streptococcus mutans bacteria was assessed via colony forming units (CFU) and optical density of bacteria before treatment and after treatment.

Results

A statistically significant increase in bacterial count was observed in the negative control group (Gp1). Treatment groups 2, 3, and 4 showed a significant reduction in bacterial count from baseline to post-treatment.Er:YAG group showed the highest percentage of reduction of bacterial count with a statistically significant difference with other groups. No statistically significant difference was shown between chlorohexidine and diode laser groups.

Conclusions

The Er:YAG laser demonstrated the highest antibacterial efficacy against Streptococcus mutans when compared with chlorhexidine and the diode laser (980 nm). Although all three disinfection methods showed significant antibacterial activity.

Clinical relevance: The superior antibacterial performance of the Er:YAG laser supports its use in clinical practice for managing deep carious lesions. These findings highlight the importance of thorough cavity disinfection before restoration placement to minimize bacterial persistence and reduce the risk of secondary caries. Clinical trial number: not applicable.