Affiliations 

  • 1 Department of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, Faculty of Dental Sciences, Sri Ramachandra University, Porur, Chennai, India
  • 2 Division of Clinical Dentistry, School of Dentistry, International Medical University, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
Cureus, 2017 Oct 26;9(10):e1805.
PMID: 29308333 DOI: 10.7759/cureus.1805

Abstract

Introduction Root canal irrigants play an important role in reducing intracanal microorganisms, which in turn helps in achieving a successful outcome for the root canal treatment. Objective To compare the antibacterial efficacy of alexidine and chlorhexidine against Enterococcus faecalis. Methods A total of 50 extracted single-rooted teeth were randomly divided into five groups after being infected with Enterococcus faecalis. The groups were based on irrigants used: Group I - 0.4% alexidine; Group II - 1% alexidine; Group III - 1.5% percent alexidine; Group IV - 2% alexidine; Group V - 2% chlorhexidine. Following irrigation, colony-forming units were determined from the dentinal shavings collected at 400 µm depth. Results Use of 2% alexidine reduced the bacteria effectively when compared to 0.4%, 1%, and 1.5% alexidine. A statistically significant difference was not observed between 2% alexidine and 2% chlorhexidine. Discussion Alexidine, due to its higher virulence factors for bacteria and better bacterial penetrability at 400 µm depth of dentin showed better eradication of Enterococcus faecalis in comparison to chlorhexidine. Conclusion The use of 2% alexidine against Enterococcus faecalis at 400 µm depth of dentin has efficacy comparable to chlorhexidine. Hence, alexidine can be used as an alternative irrigant for chlorhexidine during endodontic procedures.

* Title and MeSH Headings from MEDLINE®/PubMed®, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine.