The use of calcium hydroxide, antibiotics and biocides as antimicrobial medicaments in endodontics

Bacteria have been implicated in the pathogenesis and progression of pulp and periapical diseases. The primary aim of endodontic treatment is to remove as many bacteria as possible from the root canal system and then to create an environment in which any remaining organisms cannot survive. This can only be achieved through the use of a combination of aseptic treatment techniques, chemomechanical preparation of the root canal, antimicrobial irrigating solutions and intracanal medicaments. The choice of which intracanal medicament to use is dependent on having an accurate diagnosis of the condition being treated, as well as a thorough knowledge of the type of organisms likely to be involved and. their mechanisms of growth and survival. Since the disease is likely to have been caused by the presence of bacteria within the root canal, the use of an antimicrobial agent is essential. Many medicaments have been used in an attempt to achieve the above aims, but no single preparation has been found to be completely predictable or effective. Commonly used medicaments include calcium hydroxide, antibiotics; non-phenolic biocides, phenolic biocides and iodine compounds. Each has advantages and disadvantages, and further research is required to determine which is best suited for root canal infections.

A survey of sodium hypochlorite use by general dental practitioners and endodontists in Australia

Background: Sodium hypochlorite is used commonly as an endodontic irrigant, but there are no published reports that provide details of its use. This survey sought to determine the percentage of Australian dentists who practiced endodontics, whether they used sodium hypochlorite for irrigation, and the manner of dilution, storage and dispensing sodium hypochlorite used by both dentists and endodontists. Methods: All Australian endodontists and a stratified random sample of 200 general dentists in Australia were surveyed to address the issues identified above. Results: Almost 98 per cent of dentists surveyed performed endodontic treatment. Among endodontists, nearly 94 per cent used sodium hypochlorite for irrigation compared with just under 75 per cent of general dentists: Sodium hypochlorite use by general dentists was more common in Victoria and South Australia than in other States. An infant sanitizer (Milton or Johnson's Antibacterial Solution) was used by just over 92 per cent of general practitioners and by more than 67 per cent of endodontists. All other respondents used domestic bleach. One hundred and sixty four of the respondents (80 per cent of endodontists and over 90 per cent of general dentists) used a 1 per cent w/v solution. Ten practitioners used a 4 per cent w/v solution, five used a 2 per cent w/v solution and four used a 1.5 per cent w/v solution. Eighty per cent of the practitioners who diluted their sodium hypochlorite before use, used demineralized water for this purpose. The remainder used tap water. Only four practitioners stored sodium hypochlorite in a manner which risked light exposure and loss of available chlorine content. Conclusions: Sodium hypochlorite is commonly used as an endodontic irrigant and Australian dentists generally stored the material correctly.