English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

We compared the antibacterial and residual antimicrobial activities of five root canal irrigants (17% EDTA,2% chlorhexidine,0.2% cetrimide, MTAD, and QMix) in a model of  Enterococcus faecalis  biofilm formation. Sixty dentin blocks with 3-week  E. faecalis  biofilm were divided into six equal groups and flushed with irrigant for 2 min or left untreated. A blank control group was also established. Antibacterial activities of the irrigants were evaluated by counting colony forming units. To test residual antimicrobial activities, 280 dentin blocks were divided into seven equal groups and flushed with irrigant for 2 min or left untreated and then incubated with  E. faecalis  suspension for 48 h, or used as a blank. No bacteria were observed in the blank control group. The number of viable  E. faecalis  was significantly fewer in the irrigant-treated groups compared with the untreated control ( P  < 0.05). Among the five irrigants, QMix had the strongest antibacterial activity. Residual antimicrobial activities of CHX were significantly higher at 12 h, 24 h and 36 h compared to untreated control ( P  < 0.05). All five root canal irrigants were effective to some extent against  E. faecalis , but QMix and CHX had the strongest, and CHX the longest (up to 36 h), antimicrobial activity.

scientific reports

Antibacterial and residual antimicrobial activities against Enterococcus faecalis biofilm: A comparison between EDTA, chlorhexidine, cetrimide, MTAD and QMix