Evaluation of the antimicrobial efficacy of two combinations of drugs on bacteria taken from infected primary teeth (in vitro)
- 47 Downloads
Using a combination of metronidazole, ciprofloxacin and minocycline (3Mix) for root canal disinfection of primary teeth is a well-known technique known as the lesion sterilisation and tissue repair therapy. Minocycline has the potential to cause discoloration in treated teeth and the permanent successors. This study aimed to assess the efficacy of a new combination of antibacterial drugs, in which minocycline is replaced with clindamycin.
Thirty hopeless primary teeth according to our inclusion criteria were extracted and enrolled. The experiment was conducted in two parts: aerobic and anaerobic, and the efficacy of the two drug combinations, namely the 3Mix and the other mix (metronidazole, ciprofloxacin and clindamycin), for elimination of bacteria isolated from the primary teeth was evaluated and compared. Data were analysed using SPSS 21 via descriptive statistics and Friedman and Wilcoxon tests. Level of significance was considered at 0.05.
Except for minocycline, none of the other antibiotics in the studied concentrations (25, 50 and 100 μg/mL) were able to eliminate all the bacteria. Clindamycin alone was weaker than minocycline, but its combination with metronidazole and ciprofloxacin had the same potency with no significant difference.
Replacement of minocycline with clindamycin in the 3Mix composition is practical and can be generalised to clinical studies and ultimately to the clinical setting.
Keywords3Mix Clindamycin Root canal treatment LSTR
Funding was provided by Hamadan University of Medical Sciences.
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
The authors declare no conflict of interest.
Ethical approval was obtained from the research ethics committees at the Hamadan University of Medical Sciences and in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki Declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.
- Casamassimo PS, McTigue DJ, et al. Pediatric dentistry: infancy through adolescence. 5th ed. China: Linda Duncan; 2013.Google Scholar
- Chougule RB, Padmanabhan MY, Mandal MS. A comparative evaluation of root canal length measurement techniques in primary teeth. Pediatr Dent. 2012;34(3):53E–6E.Google Scholar
- Finn SB. Pulpal treatment of primary teeth. Clinical pedodontics. 4th ed. Philadelphia: WB Saunders Company; 1995.Google Scholar
- Hedayatipanah M, Torkzaban P, Zamani A, et al. Evaluation of antibody titer against Porphyromonas gingivalis in experimental periodontitis Induced by oral inoculation of Porphyromonas gingivalis in the rat model. Hamadan: Hamadan University of Medical Sciences; 2015.Google Scholar
- Katzung B, Trevor A. ured. Basic and clinical pharmacology. 13th ed. New York: McGraw-Hill Education; 2015.Google Scholar
- Kayalvizhi G, Subramaniyan B, Suganya G. Topical application of antibiotics in primary teeth: an overview. J Dent Child. 2013;80(2):71–9.Google Scholar
- Manuel S, Parolia A, Kundabala M, Vikram M. Non-surgical endodontic therapy using triple-antibiotic paste. Kerala Dent J. 2010;33:88–90.Google Scholar
- Saoud TMA, Ricucci D, Lin LM, Gaengler P. Regeneration and repair in endodontics—a special issue of the regenerative endodontics—a new era in clinical endodontics. Dent J. 2016;4(3):1–15.Google Scholar
- Sato T, Hoshino E, Uematsu H, Noda T. In vitro antimicrobial susceptibility to combinations of drugs of bacteria from carious and endodontic lesions of human deciduous teeth. Mol Oral Microbiol. 1993a;8(3):172–6.Google Scholar
- Torabinejad M, Fouad A, Walton RE. Endodontics: principles and practice. 5th ed. Amsterdam: Elsevier Health Sciences; 2015.Google Scholar