comparison of the antimicrobial effects of the new endodontics sealer with the commercial AH PLUS sealer

Abstract

Abstract Background: Sealers are one of the most important materials used in endodontics. In fact, these materials, as a filling material, fill the spaces between the gutta and the canal walls well to prevent the colonization of oral microorganisms in the periapical tissues and inside the canal space. A good sealer, in addition to having characteristics such as lubrication, radio-opaque, solubility, suitable working time, non-toxicity, dimensional stability and adhesion to the components inside the canal, should also be biocompatible and have antimicrobial properties. Our aim in this laboratory study was to evaluate the antimicrobial properties of a new endodontic sealer against Enterococcus faecalis bacteria and compare it with the antimicrobial effects of a commercial sealer named AH plus. Materials and methods: First, in order to prepare a new endodontics sealer, different percentages of different materials (in 5 categories A, B, C, D, E) were mixed by the spatula method. Disks with a diameter of 6 mm were prepared from the prepared sealer and used in two microbial count colony (CFU) and disk diffusion tests. For this purpose, after the discs were completely set (20 minutes), a 96-well microplate was used for CFU testing, and the discs were placed at the bottom of the microplate wells, and after the appropriate incubation period, the amount of CFU/mL was calculated. Regarding the disc diffusion method, discs with the same diameter were placed on Mueller-Hinton's culture medium (containing grass culture of bacteria) and after the appropriate incubation period, the diameter of the halos of non-growth was measured. The results were reported as descriptive statistics. A one-way ANOVA test was used to compare the antimicrobial properties between the studied groups. Graphpad 9 software was used for data analysis. A probability value of less than 0.05 was considered as a significant level. Results: For the CFU method, the one-way analysis of variance test showed that there was a significant difference between all groups (P=0.0001). Tukey's test showed that group D had the lowest amount of CFU among the new sealer groups, and its value was not significantly different from the CFU of commercial sealer group AH Plus (P>0.05). Regarding the disc diffusion method, the one-way analysis of variance test showed that there is a significant difference between all groups (P=0.0001). Tukey's test showed that group D had the largest diameter of the growth inhibition halo among the new sealer groups, and its value was not significantly different from the diameter of the lack of growth halo of the AH plus commercial sealer group (P>0.05). Conclusion: Considering that group D among the studied groups of the new sealer had antimicrobial properties comparable to the commercial sealer AH Plus, it seems that the selection of this group is to continue the further studies of this group and also to investigate the clinical process of this function. The new sealer is

suitable. It is noted that in the previous studies of this group, this new sealer had good sealing power and physicochemical properties and did not have cytotoxicity. While commercial sealer AH plus has shown moderate cytotoxicity.