An Overview on Endodontic Irrigation Solution Role in Management

Abstract Background Long-term use of urethral catheters is associated with high risk of urinary tract infection (UTI) and blockage. Microbial biofilms are a common cause of catheter blockage, reducing their lifetime and significantly increasing morbidity of UTIs. A 0.02% polyhexanide irrigation solution developed for routine mechanical rinsing shows potential for bacterial decolonization of urethral catheters and has the potential to reduce or prevent biofilm formation. Methods Using an in vitro assay with standard market-leading types of catheters artificially contaminated with clinically relevant bacteria, assays were carried out to evaluate the biofilm reduction and prevention potential of a 0.02% polyhexanide solution versus no intervention (standard approach) and irrigation with saline solution (NaCl 0.9%). The efficiency of decolonization was measured through microbial plate count and membrane filtration. Results Irrigation using a 0.02% polyhexanide solution is suitable for the decolonization of a variety of transurethral catheters. The effect observed is significant compared to irrigation with 0.9% saline solution (p = 0.002) or no treatment (p = 0.011). No significant difference was found between irrigation with 0.9% saline solution and no treatment (p = 0.74). Conclusions A 0.02% polyhexanide solution is able to reduce bacterial biofilm from catheters artificially contaminated with clinically relevant bacteria in vitro. The data shows a reduction of the viability of thick bacterial biofilms in a variety of commercially available urinary catheters made from silicone, latex-free silicone, hydrogel-coated silicone and PVC. Further research is required to evaluate the long-term tolerability and efficacy of polyhexanide in clinical practice.

Download Full-text

Outcomes of Endodontic Therapy Comparing Conventional Sodium Hypochlorite Irrigation with Passive Ultrasonic Irrigation Using Sodium Hypochlorite and Ethylenediaminetetraacetate. A Retrospective Analysis

The Open Dentistry Journal ◽

10.2174/1874210616021001375 ◽

2016 ◽

Vol 10 (1) ◽

pp. 375-381 ◽

Cited By ~ 4

Author(s):

Moritz Hertel ◽

Katja Sommer ◽

Eckehard Kostka ◽

Sandra Maria Imiolczyk ◽

Husam Ballout ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Sodium Hypochlorite ◽

Clinical Symptoms ◽

Treatment Success ◽

Success Rates ◽

Chi Square ◽

Passive Ultrasonic Irrigation ◽

Ultrasonic Irrigation ◽

Endodontic Irrigation ◽

Group 2

The aim of the present study was to investigate the clinical outcomes of two different standardized endodontic irrigation protocols. It was assumed that the additional use of ethylenediaminetetraacetate (EDTA) and passive ultrasonic irrigation (PUI) would result in an increased rate of absence of symptoms and remission based on the periapical index (PAI) compared to passive irrigation using only sodium hypochlorite (NaOCl). Data and radiographs from 199 teeth retrieved from the institutional endodontic database were analyzed retrospectively. In 106 teeth irrigation was performed using only NaOCl (protocol 1). Ninety-three teeth were irrigated using NaOCl and EDTA (protocol 2). Chlorhexidine (CHX) was additionally used in revision treatments in both groups. All irrigants in group 2 were activated by PUI. Mean follow-up periods were: protocol 1 = 9.2 ± 4.4 and protocol 2 = 6.6 ± 2.5 months (p < 0.0001 (chi-square test). The frequencies of the PAImasterpoint and PAIfollow-up scores did not differ significantly between teeth, which received either protocol 1 or 2 (p = 0.555 and 0.138). Statistical analysis revealed no significant association between treatment success (absence of clinical symptoms and PAIfollow-up = I or PAImasterpoint > PAIfollow-up > I) and the applied protocol (success rates: protocol 1 = 72.6% vs. protocol 2 = 82.8%; p = 0.203). Furthermore, the frequency of extractions did not differ significantly between the two protocols (p = 0.102). No association was found between follow-up time and treatment success (p = 0.888). The hypothesis was not confirmed. Even though the obtained success rate was higher after supplementing the irrigation protocol with EDTA and PUI, no significance was recorded. Hence, protocol 2 was not superior to protocol 1 regarding therapy success, at least within the limited follow-up period. It may be cautiously concluded that sufficient mechanical debridement combined with passive NaOCl irrigation results in comparably high success rates compared to EDTA and PUI.

Download Full-text

Plant-Based Protein Hydrolysate Improves Salinity Tolerance in Hemp: Agronomical and Physiological Aspects

Agronomy ◽

10.3390/agronomy11020342 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 11 (2) ◽

pp. 342 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Ida Di Mola ◽

Stefano Conti ◽

Eugenio Cozzolino ◽

Giuseppe Melchionna ◽

Lucia Ottaiano ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Cannabis Sativa ◽

Protein Hydrolysate ◽

Saline Water ◽

Natural Fibers ◽

Photochemical Reactions ◽

Physiological Level ◽

Affected Plant ◽

Salinity Levels ◽

Irrigation Solution ◽

Insight Into

Hemp (Cannabis sativa L.) is a multipurpose plant attracting increasing interest as a source for the production of natural fibers, paper, bio-building material and food. In this research we studied the agronomical performance of Cannabis sativa cv. Eletta Campana irrigated with saline water. Under those conditions, we tested the effect of protein hydrolysate (PH) biostimulant application in overcoming and/or balancing deleterious salinity effects. The results of the diverse treatments were also investigated at the physiological level, focusing on photosynthesis by means of a chlorophyll a fluorescence technique, which give an insight into the plant primary photochemical reactions. Four salinity levels of the irrigation solution (fresh water–EC0, and NaCl solutions at EC 2.0, 4.0 or 6.0 dS m−1, EC2, EC4 and EC6, respectively) were combined with 2 biostimulant treatments (untreated (control) or treated with a commercial legume-derived protein hydrolysate (LDPH)). The increasing salinity affected plant photochemistry resulting in lower plant growth and seed production, while the LDPH biostimulant showed a protective effect, which improved crop performance both in control and in salinity conditions. The LDPH treatment improved seeds yield (+38.6% on average of all treated plants respect to untreated plants), as well as residual biomass, relevant in fiber production.

Download Full-text