Comparison of Antibacterial Activities of Cavity Disinfectants

185
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the antibacterial effects of 4
different cavity disinfectants on Streptococcus mu-
tans, Lactobacillus acidophilus, and Enterococcus
faecalis bacteria in different time periods.
STUDY DESIGN: The antibacterial effects of Cavity
Cleanser, Tubulicid Red Label, Chloraxid 2%, and
Oxygenated Water cavity disinfectant solutions on E.
faecalis (ATCC 29212), S. mutans (ATCC 25175), and
L. acidophilus (RSKK 03037) bacterial strains were
evaluated by disk diffusion method. In the study where
vancomycin antibiogram disc constituted the positive
control group, physiological saline solution was used
as the negative control group. Standard, sterile, blank
antibiogram discs of 5 mm in diameter, in which 15 µL
of each material were added, were placed on agar plates
at 2.5–3 cm intervals. The inhibition zone diameters
formed around the discs that were left to incubate for
24–48 hours at 37°C were measured in millimeters.
Statistical analysis of the data was performed using one-
way analysis of variance, Kolmogorov-Smirnov, Levene,
and Bonferroni tests.
RESULTS: At the end of the study the solutions tested
showed a statistically significant antibacterial effect on
all bacterial strains used (p<0.05). Cavity Cleanser
disinfectant containing 2% chlorhexidine showed the
highest antibacterial effect on S. mutans and L. aci-
dophilus, and benzalkonium-containing Tubulicid Red
disinfectant on E. faecalis.
CONCLUSION: The antibacterial effect of all cavity
disinfectants used in the study was found to be higher
at the end of the 48th hour than at the end of the 24th
hour, but there was no statistically significant difference
(p>0.05). (Anal Quant Cytopathol Histpathol 2021;
43:185–192)
Keywords: antibacterial agents; antibacterial effect;
cavity disinfectants; chlorhexidine; contamination;
dental caries; disinfection; disc diffusion; gram-
negative bacteria; gram-positive bacteria.
Dental caries are bacterial infections that cause
the loss of dental hard tissue. Before the restora
tion of the decayed tooth, the infected tooth tis-
sue must be removed. Failure to remove infected
tissue can create undesirable conditions such as
toxins of microorganisms, secondary caries, post
operative sensitivity, staining, and pulpal diseases,
which lead to loss of time, labor, and costs. Dif
ferent methods are used to completely remove the
microorganisms from the remaining tooth tissue
Analytical and Quantitative Cytopathology and Histopathology®
0884-6812/21/4304-0185/$18.00/0 © Science Printers and Publishers, Inc.
Analytical and Quantitative Cytopathology and Histopathology®
Comparison of Antibacterial Activities of
Cavity Disinfectants
Şeyhmus Bakır, D.D.S., Ph.D., Elif Pınar Bakır, D.D.S., Ph.D., and
Samican Ünal, D.D.S., Ph.D.
From the Department of Restorative Dental Treatments, Faculty of Dentistry, University of Dicle, Diyarbakır, Turkey.
Şehmus Bakır is Assistant Professor.
Elif Pınar Bakır is Assistant Professor.
Samican Ünal is Dentist.
Address correspondence to: Elif Pınar Bakır, D.D.S., Ph.D., Department of Restorative Dental Treatments, Faculty of Dentistry, Univer-
sity of Dicle, 21280 Diyarbakır, Turkey (dentistpinarbakir@gmail.com).
Financial Disclosure: The authors have no connection to any companies or products mentioned in this article.

after preparation. The most common technique
used in clinical practice is the examination method
with an excavator and a mirror. However, me-
chanical preparation of the tissue is not sufficient
for microorganism elimination.1
Streptococcus mutans, Lactobacillus acidophilus, and
Enterococcus faecalis bacteria are blamed for tooth
decay. Streptococcus mutans, a facultative anaer
obe, is very sensitive to penicillins and halogen-
containing antiseptics. With a large amount of
decayed tooth tissue, it is possible to explain it
as acidogenic, aciduric, and cariogenic. These bac-
teria are present in small amounts or absent in
non-carious teeth.2 Although Lactobacillus acidophi-
lus is detected in quite a large number of patients
with active tooth decay, it is not solely responsible
for the onset of caries since it is not one of the first
colonized bacteria. However, it is shown as the
main factor in the progression of caries.3 Enterococ-
cus faecalis are facultative anaerobe gram-positive
streptococci. The absence of root canals of teeth
without endodontic treatment suggests that secon-
dary infections are the main factor. Studies have
reported that the main bacteria isolated from root
canals is Enterococcus faecalis.4
Some researchers think that the use of caries
staining agents after cavity preparation is a more
accurate approach since the region where micro
organisms are found can be determined.5 However,
there are studies stating that the use of dyes is
insufficient in detecting bacteria. It is thought that
the traditional restorative treatment plan, based
on caries risk status, has been shown to reduce the
caries increment by about 20–38% in high-caries-
risk adult patients.6
The antibacterial effects of cavity disinfectants
are seen in their contents thanks to high disinfec-
tant agents such as chlorhexidine, sodium hypo-
chlorite, and hydrogen peroxide. It is predicted
that the use of solutions containing these agents
in appropriate doses after the cavity preparation
will ensure the elimination of microorganisms re
maining in the cavity and consequently reduce
the formation of secondary caries.7 Cavity Cleanser
disinfectant agent used in the study is a solution
containing 2% chlorhexidine digluconate. In addi-
tion to its use as cavity disinfection, it is preferred
for moistening the cavity. It is recommended to be
used after the cavity preparation is finished and
before the bonding agent is applied .8 Tubulicid
Red Label, the other disinfectant used, contains 1%
sodium fluoride, 0.2% EDTA, and 0.1% benzal
konium chloride. Tubulicid Red Label, which is
frequently preferred in cavity disinfection and fluo-
ride surface cleaning, helps to remove debris with
out opening the dentin tubules during preparation.
Chloraxid 2% is a cavity solution containing 2%
sodium hypochlorite that enables the removal of
dead pulp tissues during mechanical canal expan-
sion. This solution used in cavity cleaning also
prevents tooth color changes that may occur when
not rinsed after root canal filling.9 The Oxygena-
ted Water agent used in the study contains 3%
hydrogen peroxide. Oxygenated Water solution,
which is widely used as an antiseptic and disinfe-
ctant, is also indicated for use in septic socket and
root canal cleaning.10
Although many different study procedures, such
as disc and pit agar diffusion methods, E-Test and
dilution tests, and automated and molecular study
methods, have been used in studies evaluating
antibacterial activities, the disk diffusion method is
frequently preferred in dental studies. It is cheap,
practical, and provides the opportunity to compare
more than one material at the same time.11
The aim of this study was to evaluate the an-
tibacterial efficacy of Cavity Cleanser containing
chlorhexidine, Tubulid Red containing benzalko-
nium chloride, Chloraxid containing sodium hypo
chlorite, and Oxygenated Water containing hydro
gen peroxide against S. mutans, L. Acidophilus, and
E. faecalis bacterial strains that are effective in the
caries formation mechanism.
Materials and Methods
The cavity disinfectant agents used in the study are
listed in Table I.
Supply and Preparation of Microorganisms
Our study was carried out in the Department
of Microbiology, Ankara University Faculty of
Medicine. The microorganisms used were obtained
from Ankara Refik Saydam Hifsisihha Center. In
186 Analytical and Quantitative Cytopathology and Histopathology®
Bakır et al
Table I Materials Tested for Antibacterial Activities in the Study
and Their Contents
Product trade name Manufacturer Lot no.
Cavity Cleanser BISCO Inc., USA 1900000744
Tubulicid Red Label Dental Therapeutics AB,
Sweden
311115 1227
Chloraxid 2% Cerkamed, Poland 2711181
Oxygenated Water Dermosept, Turkey DO072018

this study, standard, lyophilized, E. faecalis (ATCC
29212), S. mutans (ATCC 25175), and L. acidophilus
(RSKK 03037) strains were homogenized with 5 mL
physiological salt solution (PSS). It was inoculated
in BHI (Brain Heart Infusion) broth for E. faecalis
and S. mutans strains, and MRS (De Man, Rogosa
and Sharpe) broth for L. acidophilus strain (RSKK
03037). It was left to incubate for 24–48 hours in
an oven with CO2 at 37°C (Heraeus, Germany).
After 48 hours the bacteria that were controlled
for growth with Gram stain were passaged into
BHI agar and MRS broth agar solid media. Then, it
was kept in an oven with CO2 at 37°C for 24 hours.
After the incubation, bacterial colonies that were
found to grow at a sufficient level were taken with
sterile swab, and bacterial suspensions were pre-
pared in 3 mL PSS and 0.5 McFarland turbidity
(1.5×108 CFU/mL) (Biosan SIA, Latvia). Bacteria
were spread on all surfaces of BHIA (Brain Heart
Infusion Agar) and MRS broth agar solid plates
with sterile swabs from these solutions mixed with
a Vortex device (Biosan SIA, Latvia).
Placement of Antibiogram Discs
In our study, after adding Cavity Cleanser, Tubu-
licid Red Label, Chloraxid 2%, and Oxygenated
Water, vancomycin, and physiological salt solution
to pre-prepared standard, 5-mm-diameter, sterile,
empty antibiogram discs, the discs were placed on
the plates at 2.5–3 cm intervals. Six discs were used
in each petri dish: 4 antibiogram discs (15 µL) im-
pregnated with cavity disinfectant, 1 antibiogram
disc impregnated with physiological salt solution
(15 µL), and 1 vancomycin-impregnated antibio
gram disc (30 mg). The same procedures were re-
peated in 10 separate petri dishes for each micro-
organism. The positive control group consisted of
30 mg vancomycin-impregnated antibiogram disk,
and the negative control group consisted of anti-
biogram disk impregnated with 15 µL of physio-
logical saline solution. After the procedures were
completed, it was kept at 37°C for 24–48 hours in
a CO2 oven in order to reproduce the bacteria on
the plates.
Measuring Zone Diameters
The plates taken out of the oven were checked for
reproduction. The diameter of inhibition around
the discs was evaluated at 24 and 48 hours by
measuring with a millimeter inhibition zone scale.
Measurements were made from the two outer-
most points of the inhibition ring formed around
the disc. In order to evaluate the results effective-
ly, inhibition zone diameters in millimeters were
recorded by two different microbiologists.
Statistical Analysis
In this study, mean and standard deviation were
given as descriptive statistics, and the conformity
of continuous variables to the assumption of nor-
mality distribution was evaluated by Kolmogorov-
Smirnov test and homogeneity by Levene’s test.
One-way analysis of variance (one-way ANOVA),
which is one of the parametric analysis tests,
was used to compare the differences between the
means of independent groups, and the Bonferroni
test was used for multiple comparisons between
groups.
The significance level was set at 0.05 while inter
preting the results. It was stated that there is a
significant difference when p<0.05, and there is no
significant difference if p>0.05.
Results
We aimed to compare the antibacterial efficacy of
4 different cavity disinfectant impregnated anti
biogram discs using the disc diffusion method at
24 and 48 hours.
The placement scheme of the cavity disinfectants
used in the study and the expansions of the abbre-
viations are shown in Figure 1.
Cavity Cleanser, Tubulicid Red Label, Chloraxid
2%, Oxygenated Water (study groups) and van-
comycin (positive control group) were found to be
significantly effective for all 3 bacteria. It has been
determined that physiological salt solution, which
constitutes the negative control group, does not
form a bacterial inhibition zone. The average and
standard deviation values of the inhibition zone
diameters of the cavity disinfectants at 24 and 48
hours are shown in Table II.
It was observed that the sizes of the zone diame-
ter formed by the materials applied on Streptococ-
cus mutans bacteria at 24 and 48 hours were, from
largest to smallest, Cavity Cleanser, vancomycin,
Tubulicid Red Label, Oxygenated Water, and Chlo-
raxid 2%, respectively. We observed that the sizes
of the zone diameter formed by the materials
applied on Lactobacillus acidophilus bacteria at 24
and 48 hours were, from largest to smallest, Cavity
Cleanser, Tubulicid Red Label, Oxygenated Water,
Chloraxid 2%, and vancomycin, respectively. In
addition, the sizes of the zone diameter formed
by the materials applied on Enterococcus faecalis
Volume 43, Number 4/August 2021 187
Antibacterial Activities of Cavity Disinfectants

bacteria at 24 and 48 hours were, from largest to
smallest, Tubulicid Red Label, Cavity Cleanser,
Oxygenated Water, vancomycin, and Chloraxid 2%,
respectively. The inhibition zone diameters of the
cavity disinfectants used in the study on S. mutans,
L. acidophilus, and E. faecalis bacteria strains at 24
hours are shown in Figure 2, and the inhibition
zone diameters they formed at 48 hours are shown
in Figure 3.
Comparison of Antibacterial Activities of Cavity
Disinfectants According to Different Time Zones
Considering the antibacterial effects of cavity dis
infectants on S. mutans, it was observed that all
disinfectants were significantly effective. In paired
comparisons, all cavity disinfectants showed a
statistically significant difference when compared
with all other cavity disinfectants at 24 and 48
hours (p<0.05). However, when Tubulicid Red
Label was compared with vancomycin (p>0.05) at
the end of 24 and 48 hours, there was no statisti-
cally significant difference.
Considering the antibacterial effects on L. aci-
dophilus, all disinfectants were found to be signi-
ficantly effective. In paired comparisons, Cavity
Cleanser, Chloraxid 2%, physiological salt solu-
tion, and vancomycin showed a statistically signif
icant difference as compared to all cavity disinfec-
tants (p<0.05). However, when Tubulicid Red Label
was compared with Oxygenated Water (p>0.05) at
the end of 24 and 48 hours, there was no statisti-
cally significant difference. When Tubulicid Red
Label was compared with other cavity disinfec-
tants, a statistically significant difference was found
(p<0.05).
Considering the antibacterial effects on E. faeca-
lis, all disinfectants were found to be significantly
effective. Chloraxid 2%, physiological salt solu-
tion, and vancomycin showed a statistically signif
icant difference as compared to all cavity disinfec-
tants (p<0.05). However, no statistically significant
difference was found in binary comparisons of
Cavity Cleanser, Tubulicid Red Label, and Oxyge-
nated Water disinfectants with each other (p>0.05).
When these disinfectants were compared with
Chloraxid 2%, physiological salt solution, and van-
Bakır et al
Figure 1
Placement scheme of cavity
disinfectants and explanation
of abbreviations.
Table II Mean and Standard Deviation Values of Inhibition Zone Diameters of Cavity Disinfectants at 24 and 48 Hours (n=10)
Cavity Cleanser Tubulicid Red Label Chloraxid 2% Oxygenated Water PSS Vancomycin
(Mean±SD) (Mean±SD) (Mean±SD) (Mean±SD) (Mean±SD) (Mean±SD)
S. Mutans
24 h 33.40±0.476 25±0.537 15.30±0.790 20.90±0.862 0 27.10±0.277
48 h 34.80±0.929 25.40±0.618 15.80±0.827 21.70±0.746 0 27.60±0.221
L. Acidophilus
24 h 29.60±0.968 22.30±0.955 16.10±1.187 22.20±0.892 0 7.50±0.342
48 h 29.80±0.827 22.70±0.746 16.80±0.879 22.60±0.718 0 7.70±0.335
E. Faecalis
24 h 23.70±0.746 24.10±0.433 14.30±0.335 22.60±0.618 0 17.80±0.133
48 h 24±0.699 24.50±0.601 14.50±0.428 23±0.632 0 18±0.471
The inhibition zone diameters formed around the discs that were left to incubate for 24–48 hours at 37°C were measured in millimeters.

comycin, a statistically significant difference was
found (p<0.05).
Comparison of Antibacterial Activities of the Same
Cavity Disinfectant According to Different Time
Periods
The effect of all cavity disinfectants used in the
study on Streptococcus mutans, Lactobacillus acidop-
hilus, and Enterococcus faecalis bacteria at the end
of 48 hours was found to be greater than the effect
at 24 hours. However, when the time periods were
compared statistically, no significant difference
was found (p>0.05). Physiological salt solution,
which constitutes the negative control group, was
not included in the statistical evaluation due to
the lack of bacterial inhibition zone measurement.
Comparison of Antibacterial Activities of Cavity
Disinfectants Applied in the Same Time Based on
Different Bacteria
Cavity Cleanser disinfectant showed the greatest
effect on Streptococcus mutans bacteria at the end
of 24 and 48 hours. It was observed that Lactoba
cillus acidophilus and Enterococcus faecalis followed,
respectively.
Tubulicid Red Label disinfectant showed the
greatest effect on Streptococcus mutans bacteria at
the end of 24 and 48 hours. It was observed that
Enterococcus faecalis and Lactobacillus acidophilus fol-
lowed, respectively.
Chloraxid 2% disinfectant showed the greatest
effect on Lactobacillus acidophilus bacteria at the
end of 24 and 48 hours. It was observed that Strep-
tococcus mutans and Enterococcus faecalis followed,
respectively.
Oxygenated Water disinfectant showed the
greatest effect on Enterococcus faecalis bacteria at
the end of 24 and 48 hours. It was observed that
Lactobacillus acidophilus and Streptococcus mutans
followed, respectively.
Vancomycin antibiogram disc showed the great
est effect on Streptococcus mutans bacteria in the
same period, followed by Enterococcus faecalis and
Lactobacillus acidophilus, respectively.
Figure 2
Inhibition zone diameters
formed by the disinfectants
used in the 24th hour.
Figure 3
Inhibition zone diameters
formed by the disinfectants
used in the 48th hour.

Discussion
In our study, Streptococcus mutans, which is con
sidered to initiate enamel caries, Lactobacillus aci-
dophilus, which is responsible for the progression
and development of caries, and Enterococcus fae-
calis bacteria strains, which are the most com-
mon bacteria in intra-canal infections, were used.
Vancomycin, which shows bactericidal effect only
against gram-positive bacteria, constitutes the posi-
tive control group in our study. Antibacterial acti-
vities of vancomycins, which act by disrupting
bacterial cell wall synthesis, have been shown in
many studies.12 Pasquantonio et al13 and Süzük et
al14 showed the susceptibility of streptococci and
lactobacilli to vancomycin in their studies. Pinheiro
et al,15 Reynaud et al,16 and Golob et al17 showed
that Enterococcus faecalis strains were susceptible to
vancomycin in their studies. All bacterial strains
used in our study showed susceptibility to van-
comycin and were consistent with studies in the
literature.
Antibacterial dentin bonding agents used for
bacterial elimination in clinical use are often
not sufficient. Many cavity disinfectants such as
chlorhexidine gluconate, hydrogen peroxide, and
sodium hypochlorite are used to eliminate bacte
ria remaining in the cavity.18 The aim of this study
was to evaluate the antibacterial efficacy of Cavity
Cleanser containing 2% chlorhexidine, Tubulid
Red Label containing 0.1% benzalkonium chlo-
ride, Chloraxid containing 2% sodium hypochlo-
rite, and Oxygenated Water containing 3% hy-
drogen peroxide against S. mutans, L. acidophilus,
and E. faecalis bacterial strains. The positive con
trol group of our study consisted of vancomycin,
which showed bactericidal effect against gram-
positive bacteria, and the negative control group
was composed of physiological salt solution, which
is known to have no antibacterial effect.
In antibacterial studies based on the measure-
ment of bacterial zone diameters, it was reported
that gluconate produced a larger inhibition zone
diameter on S. mutans than on L. acidophilus. In our
study it was observed that the bacterial inhibition
zone diameter produced by the Cavity Cleanser
solution containing 2% chlorhexidine gluconate
was wider than the inhibition zone diameter cre
ated by S. mutans, and this situation was found to
be compatible with current studies.19,20
Türkün et al21 showed that benzalkonium chlo
ride has antibacterial activity on S. mutans micro
organisms in their other study. In our study, Tu
bulicid Red solution with benzalkonium content
showed a strong antibacterial effect on all bacterial
strains, complying with literature studies.
Botelho et al22 used Tubulicid Blue containing
0.3% cocoamphodiacetate, 0.1% benzalkonium
chloride, and 0.2% disodium edetate dihydrate in
their antibacterial efficacy study. When the results
obtained in their studies were examined, L. acidop-
hilus created larger inhibition diameters than did S.
mutans. They attributed this to the fact that Tubu-
licid Red contains 1% NaF, unlike Tubulicid Blue.
It is observed that the antibacterial activities of
the disinfectant solutions used in the study vary
according to the bacterial species. Türkün et al23
reported that the sodium hypochlorite agent had
similar antibacterial effects on S. mutans and L. aci
dophilus in their other studies. In the same study
it was observed that the microorganism in which
0.1% benzalkonium chloride disinfectant was most
effective in the first 24 hours was S. mutans. Re-
searchers reported that the antibacterial activ
ity order of the materials was Concepsis, 5.25%
NaOCl, and Tubulicid Red, respectively, from the
highest to the lowest. In our study the antibacteri
al zone diameters formed by sodium hypochlorite
around mutans and lactobacilli are close to each
other and did not create a statistical difference. In
addition, Enterococcus faecalis was found to be the
most effective microorganism group in the first 24
hours with a 0.1% benzalkonium chloride disinfec-
tant. We think that this is because they did not use
the enterococcus species. The finding that 2% chlor-
hexidine has the highest antibacterial effect in our
study is consistent with the study of Turkun et al.24
Lessa et al25 examined the antibacterial efficacy
of different concentrations of chlorhexidine agents
(0.12%, 0.2%, 1%, and 2%) on S. mutans in their
studies supporting our opinion. They reported that
there was a statistically significant relationship
between dose increase and antibacterial efficacy.
Akyuz et al26 reported that no antibacterial effect
was found for the second and third applications.
In the first application, however, irradiation with
extract + Streptococcus mutans mixture reduced the
number of microorganisms in the beginning by
99% for only Rumex cristatus DC. extract (log 2).
Bin-Shuwaish27 found that hydrogen peroxide had
more antibacterial effect on L. acidophilus than did
chlorhexidine gluconate, in addition to its antiba-
cterial effect on S. mutans. However, in our study
chlorhexidine had a greater effect on lactobacilli
than did hydrogen peroxide.
Bakır et al

The dose of the disinfectant solution to be used
for providing oral disinfection is important. In our
study, Chloraxid solution containing 2% NaOCl
was used. Although studies show that increasing
the dose will increase the antibacterial effect, doses
used above certain levels are not suitable for oral
use. Cha et al28 used Cavity Cleanser containing
2% chlorhexidine, 6% Sodium Hypochlorite, and
0.01% urushiol as a cavity disinfectant in their
antibacterial studies on S. mutans and counted the
remaining bacterial colonies. As a result of the
study, all three disinfectants showed a strong an
tibacterial effect within 30 minutes, and there was
no bacterial colony in the environment. Kim et
al,29 in their studies with the same agents in class I
cavities, support the findings of Cha et al28 by
reporting that the agents have a strong antibac-
terial effect on mutans. Although the doses used in
these literature studies show strong antibacterial
effects, 6% NaOCl is not considered suitable for
oral use.
Elgamily et al30 compared NanoCare, an alcohol
solution containing nanoparticles, and 0.2% chlor-
hexidine solution in their antibacterial studies on
mutans. They reported that 0.2% chlorhexidine
solution caused a much more significant decrease
in the number of bacterial colonies as compared to
NanoCare solution.
Vivek Aithal et al31 examined gram-positive and
gram-negative bacteria, including Lactobacilli, in
their studies for the disinfection of orthodontic
braces. They stated that 2% chlorhexidine has
a strong antibacterial effect against both gram-
positive and gram-negative bacteria.
The most common method used in antibacterial
studies in dentistry is the disc diffusion method.
The advantages are that the method is inexpen
sive, practical, easy, and allows multiple material
comparison. However, one of the disadvantages
of the method is that the type of effect—bacteri-
cidal/bacteriostatic—of the material used cannot
be determined and the duration of action cannot
be determined. Studies conducted with the use
of antibacterial solutions are often limited to end
of 24 hour evaluations. In our study, although
the antibacterial effect seen at the end of the 48th
hour was higher than the effect seen at the end
of the 24th hour, it was observed that it did not
create a statistically significant difference. The
reason for this is thought to be that the study
was carried out under in vitro conditions and the
rate of action may decrease due to the nutrient
consumption of the bacteria in the agar disc plates
over time.32
The studies conducted reveal the effect of the
antibacterial test method used on the study result.
In another study by Türkün et al,23 the effective-
ness of different methods on antibacterial results
was examined. While hydrogen peroxide was the
most effective in pit agar technique, it was deter
mined as chlorhexidine gluconate in the disk dif-
fusion technique. This result shows that method
differences may cause different results. Türkün et
al21 examined the antibacterial effects of different
cavity disinfectants such as Consepsis, Tubulicid
Red, and 3% Hydrogen Peroxide on teeth with
cavities. They found that the most effective agent
on S. mutans was hydrogen peroxide. This study is
not compatible with our study.
Conclusion
In our study it was observed that Cavity Cleanser
containing chlorhexidine gluconate and Tubuli-
cid Red Label solutions containing benzalkonium
chloride showed higher antibacterial activity on
S. mutans, Chloraxid 2% containing sodium hypo
chlorite on L. acidophilus, and Oxygenated Water
solution containing hydrogen peroxide on E. fae-
calis.
As a result of the studies, it is thought that the
use of these cavity disinfectants will be benefici-
al against S. mutans, L. acidophilus, and E. faecalis
bacteria, which are involved in the formation and
development mechanism of caries. In addition, it
is assumed that secondary caries can be prevented
by this means. However, long-term clinical studies
will be beneficial.
References
1. Gao X, Jiang S, Koh D, Hsu CY: Salivary biomarkers for den-
tal caries. Periodontol 2000 2016;70:128-141
2. Ge Y, Caufield PW, Fisch GS, Li Y: Streptococcus mutans and
Streptococcus sanguinis colonization correlated with caries
experience in children. Caries Res 2008;42:444-448
3. Elgamily H, Safy R, Makharita L: Influence of medicinal
plant extracts on the growth of oral pathogens Streptococcus
Mutans and Lactobacillus Acidophilus: An in-vitro study.
Open Access Maced J Med Sci 2019;7:2328-2334
4. Lin YH, Mickel AK, Chogle S: Effectiveness of selected mate-
rials against Enterococcus faecalis: Part 3. The antibacterial
effect of calcium hydroxide and chlorhexidine on Enterococ-
cus faecalis. J Endod 2003;29:565-566
5. Autio-Gold JT, Tomar SL: Prevalence of noncavitated and
cavitated carious lesions in 5-year-old head start school-
children in Alachua County, Florida. Pediatr Dent 2005;27:
54-60

6. Featherstone JDB, Chaffee BW: The Evidence for Caries
Management by Risk Assessment (CAMBRA®). Adv Dent
Res 2018;29:9-14
7. Feuerstein O, Matalon S, Slutzky H, Weiss EI: Antibacterial
properties of self-etching dental adhesive systems. J Am
Dent Assoc 2007;138:349-354
8. Gupta J, Thomas MS, Radhakrishna M, Srikant N, Ginjupalli
K: Effect of silver diamine fluoride-potassium iodide and
2% chlorhexidine gluconate cavity cleansers on the bond
strength and microleakage of resin-modified glass ionomer
cement. J Conserv Dent 2019;22:201-206
9. Prasansuttiporn T, Nakajima M, Kunawarote S, Foxton RM,
Tagami J: Effect of reducing agents on bond strength to
NaOCl-treated dentin. Dent Mater 2011;27:229-234
10. Menezes RP, Silva PD, Leal PC, Faria-E-Silva AL: Impact of
35% hydrogen peroxide on color and translucency changes
in enamel and dentin. Braz Dent J 2018;29:88-92
11. Ogata SK, Gales AC, Kawakami E: Antimicrobial suscepti-
bility testing for Helicobacter pylori isolates from Brazilian
children and adolescents: Comparing agar dilution, E-test,
and disk diffusion. Braz J Microbiol 2015;45:1439-1448
12. Deresinski S: Vancomycin in combination with other anti
biotics for the treatment of serious methicillin-resistant
Staphylococcus aureus infections. Clin Infect Dis 2009;49:
1072-1079
13. Pasquantonio G, Condò S, Cerroni L, Bikiqu L, Nicoletti M,
Prenna M, Ripa S: Antibacterial activity of various antibiot
ics against oral streptococci isolated oral cavity. Int J Immu-
nopathol Pharmacol 2012;25:805-809
14. Süzük S, Kaşkatepe B, Çetin M: Antimicrobial susceptibility
against penicillin, ampicillin and vancomycin of viridans
group Streptococcus in oral microbiota of patients at risk of
infective endocarditis. Infez Med 2016;24:190-193
15. Pinheiro ET, Gomes BP, Drucker DB, Zaia AA, Ferraz CC,
Souza-Filho FJ: Antimicrobial susceptibility of E. faecalis iso-
lated from canals of root filled teeth with periapical lesions.
Int Endod J 2004;37:756-763
16. Reynaud Af Geijersstam AH, Ellington MJ, Warner M,
Woodford N, Haapasalo M: Antimicrobial susceptibility and
molecular analysis of E. faecalis origiating from endodontic
infections in Finland and Lithuania. Oral Microbiol Immu-
nol 2006;21:164-168
17. Golob M, Pate M, Kušar D, Dermota U, Avberšek J, Papić B,
Zdovc I: Antimicrobial resistance and virulence genes in En
terococcus faecium and Enterococcus faecalis from humans
and retail red meat. Biomed Res Int 2019;2019:2815279
18. Rôças IN, Provenzano JC, Neves MA, Siqueira JF Jr: Disin
fecting effects of rotary instrumentation with either 2.5%
sodium hypochlorite or 2% chlorhexidine as the main irri-
gant: A randomized clinical study. J Endod 2016;42:943-947
19. Emilson CG: Potential efficacy of chlorhexidine against mu
tans streptococci and human dental caries. J Dent Res 1994;
73:682-691
20. Hosida TY, Delbem ACB, Morais LA, Moraes JCS, Duque
C, Souza JAS, Pedrini D: Ion release, antimicrobial and
physio-mechanical properties of glass ionomer cement con-
taining micro or nanosized hexametaphosphate, and their
effect on enamel demineralization. Clin Oral Investig 2019;
23:2345-2354
21. Türkün M, Türkün LS, Ergücü Z, Ateş M: Is an antibacterial
adhesive system more effective than cavity disinfectants?
Am J Dent 2006;19:166-170
22. Botelho MG: Fractional inhibitory concentration index of
combinations of antibacterial agents against cariogenic orga-
nisms. J Dent 2000;28:565-570
23. Türkün M, Türkün LS, Ateş M: Antibacterial activity of
cavity disinfectants. Balk J Stom 2004;8:214-219
24. Turkun M, Ozata F, Uzer E, Ates M: Antimicrobial substan
tivity of cavity disinfectants. Gen Dent 2005;53:182-186
25. Lessa FC, Nogueira I, Vargas Fda S, Spolidorio DM, Hebling
J, García-Godoy F, Costa CA: Direct and transdentinal anti-
bacterial activity of chlorhexidine. Am J Dent 2010;23:255-
259
26. Akyuz S, Chousein Ntemir OM, Sacan O, Yanardag R,
Kalaycı S, Yarat A, Sahin F: Antibacterial and photodynamic
effects of some plant extracts for cavity disinfection. Photo-
diagnosis Photodyn Ther 2019;26:48-52
27. Bin-Shuwaish MS: Effects and effectiveness of cavity disin
fectants in operative dentistry: A literature review. J Con-
temp Dent Pract 2016;17:867-879
28. Cha HS, Shin DH: Antibacterial capacity of cavity disin-
fectants against Streptococcus mutans and their effects on
shear bond strength of a self-etch adhesive. Dent Mater J
2016;35:147-152
29. Kim BR, Oh MH, Shin DH: Effect of cavity disinfectants
on antibacterial activity and microtensile bond strength in
class I cavity. Dent Mater J 2017;36:368-373
30. Elgamily HM, El-Sayed HS, Abdelnabi A: The antibacterial
effect of two cavity disinfectants against one of cariogenic
pathogen: An in vitro comparative study. Contemp Clin
Dent 2018;9:457-462
31. Vivek Aithal PR, Akshai Shetty KR, Dinesh MR, Amarnath
BC, Prashanth CS, Roopak MD: In vitro evaluation of mi-
crobial contamination and the disinfecting efficacy of chlor-
hexidine on orthodontic brackets. Prog Orthod 2019;20(1):17
32. Imazato S, Kuramoto A, Takahashi Y, Ebisu S, Peters MC:
In vitro antibacterial effects of the dentin primer of Clearfil
Protect Bond. Dent Mater 2006;22:527-532
Bakır et al

Comparison of Antibacterial Activities of Cavity Disinfectants

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (18)

Similar to Comparison of Antibacterial Activities of Cavity Disinfectants

Similar to Comparison of Antibacterial Activities of Cavity Disinfectants (20)

More from ANALYTICAL AND QUANTITATIVE CYTOPATHOLOGY AND HISTOPATHOLOGY

More from ANALYTICAL AND QUANTITATIVE CYTOPATHOLOGY AND HISTOPATHOLOGY (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Comparison of Antibacterial Activities of Cavity Disinfectants