Home Print this page Email this page Users Online: 195
Home About us Editorial board Search Ahead of print Current issue Archives Submit article Instructions Subscribe Contacts Login 

 Table of Contents  
LETTER TO EDITOR
Year : 2015  |  Volume : 5  |  Issue : 1  |  Page : 65-66

Author's Reply


Department of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, Kothiwal Dental College and Research Centre, Moradabad, Uttar Pradesh, India

Date of Web Publication12-Jan-2015

Correspondence Address:
Paridhi Garg
Department of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, Kothiwal Dental College and Research Centre, Moradabad - 244 001, Uttar Pradesh
India
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


Rights and PermissionsRights and Permissions

How to cite this article:
Garg P. Author's Reply. Saudi Endod J 2015;5:65-6

How to cite this URL:
Garg P. Author's Reply. Saudi Endod J [serial online] 2015 [cited 2019 Dec 8];5:65-6. Available from: http://www.saudiendodj.com/text.asp?2015/5/1/65/149103

Sir,

I am glad that you read my article with so much intricacy and took out time to cite these valid questions.

Sir, it is mentioned in the article that the samples were sterilized by ultraviolet radiation with a dosage 300 kJ/cm 2 for 10 minutes in the laminar airflow. However, all the specimens were also sterilized in an autoclave for two cycles. The first cycle at 121°C and the second with the specimens immersed in 1 mL of brain heart infusion (BHI) broth in individual microcentrifuge tubes before starting. [1]

As far as the dentinal tubule penetration is concerned, it has been studied in further studies. This was a preliminary study which was conducted to ascertain which herbal irrigants are efficacious against E. faecalis. I have conducted further studies on dentinal tubule disinfection with the irrigants which gave the best results in this study, which should be published soon.

According to Zehnder, [2] chlorhexidine cannot be advocated as the main irrigant in standard endodontic cases, because chlorhexidine is unable to dissolve necrotic tissue remnants. Thus, it was not included in this study as it was to ascertain the antimicrobial efficacy. However, it has been included in the further studies on dentinal tubule disinfection.

The purity of the culture was confirmed by gram staining, catalase production test, and colony morphology on blood agar infusion broth agar. [3]

For antimicrobial efficacy studies, paper point method has been suggested. [3] Dentinal shavings has been suggested for dentinal tubule disinfection studies, thus this study model has been used in the further studies. [1]

 
  References Top

1.
Krithikadatta J, Indira R, Dorothykalyani AL. Disinfection of dentinal tubules with 2% chlorhexidine, 2% metronidazole, bioactive glass when compared with calcium hydroxide as intracanal medicaments. J Endod 2007;33:1473-6.  Back to cited text no. 1
    
2.
Zehnder M. Root canal irrigants. J Endod 2006;32:389-98.  Back to cited text no. 2
    
3.
Gomes BP, Souza SF, Ferraz CC, Teixeira FB, Zaia AA, Valdrighi L, et al. Effectiveness of 2% chlorhexidine gel and calcium hydroxide against Enterococcus faecalis in bovine root dentine in vitro. Int Endod J 2003;36:267-75.  Back to cited text no. 3
    




 

Top
 
 
  Search
 
Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
Access Statistics
Email Alert *
Add to My List *
* Registration required (free)

 
  In this article
References

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed1028    
    Printed22    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded138    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal