Influence of endodontic instrument-holder on sterilization efficacy. A pilot in-vitro study.
Abstract
Infection control is crucial in dentistry and various methods have been designed to assure its efficacy. However, little information exists regarding the influence it could have the instrument-holder of endodontic files. The aim of this research was to determine the influence of three instruments-holders on sterilization efficacy of endodontic files. Methods: A pilot in-vitro study. 60 endodontic files were contaminated by biomechanical preparation of extracted molars with periapical abscess, then processed according to the standard washing method. The endodontic files were divided into 3 groups (n = 20) and assigned to 3 instrument-holders: Metallic box (MB), surgical gauze (SG) and synthetic sponge (SS). Then, the files were packaged and sterilized by autoclaving (134°C/45min). Microbiological culture was performed in thioglycolate solution for each endodontic file (37ºC/5days). Results: The overall sterilization efficacy was 91.7%, 80% for MB, 100% for SS, and 95% for SG, with no statistically significant differences (p = 0.06) between the groups. Conclusions: The lack of differences in the efficacy of sterilization may be due to the reduced sample; therefore, a full-size study is necessary to confirm this outcomes. The results of this study discourage the use of the MB as instrument-holder until a full-size study can confirm this data.
Keywords: endodontics, sterilization, efficacy, instrument.
El control de infecciones es crucial en odontología y variados métodos se han diseñado para asegurar su eficacia. Sin embargo, existe poca información respecto a la influencia que podría tener el porta-instrumento de limas endodónticas. El objetivo de esta investigación es determinar la influencia de 3 porta-instrumentos sobre la eficacia de esterilización de limas endodónticas. Método: Estudio in-vitro piloto. 60 limas endodónticas fueron contaminadas mediante preparación biomecánica de molares extraídos con diagnóstico de absceso periapical, procesadas según el método de lavado estándar, divididas en 3 grupos (n=20) y asignadas a 3 porta-instrumentos: caja metálica (CM), gasa quirúrgica (GQ) y esponja sintética (ES); luego empacadas y esterilizadas en autoclave (134ºC/45min). Se realizó un cultivo microbiológico en solución de Tioglicolato de cada una de las limas (37ºC/5días). Resultados: La eficacia de esterilización general fue 91,7%, para CM de 80%, ES de 100% y GQ de 95%; no se hallaron diferencias estadísticamente significativas (p=0,06). Conclusiones: La falta de diferencias en la eficacia de esterilización puede deberse a la muestra reducida, por lo que se necesita realizar un estudio con tamaño completo. Los resultados de este estudio desaconsejan el uso de la CM como porta-instrumento hasta que un estudio de tamaño completo confirme estos datos.
Palabras clave: endodoncia, esterilización, eficacia, instrumento.
References
2. Walker JT, Dickinson J, Sutton JM, Raven ND, Marsh PD. Cleanability of dental instruments – implications of residual protein and risks from CreutzfeldtJakob disease. Br Dent J. 2007; 203(7): 395401.
3. Hubbard T, Smyth R. Chairside decontamination of endodontic files. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol. 1975; 40(1): 14852.
4. Grossman L. Práctica Endodóntica. Buenos Aires: Editorial Mundi S.A.I.C. y F: 4ª Edición; 1981.
5. Soares I, Goldberg F. Endodoncia, técnica y fundamentos. Buenos Aires: Editorial Médica Panamericana; 2002.
6. Morrison A, Conrod S. Dental burs and endodontic files. are routine sterilization procedures effective. J Can Dent Assoc. 2009; 75(1): 39.
7. Wu G, Yu X. Influence of Usage History, Instrument Complexity, and Different Cleaning Procedures on the Cleanliness of Blood Contaminated Dental Surgical Instruments. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 2009; 30(7): 7024.
8. Assaf M, Mellor AC, Qualtrough AJ. Cleaning endodontic files in a washer disinfector. Br Dent J. 2008; 204(10): E17.
9. Van Eldik DA, Zilm PS, Rogers AH, Marin PD. Microbiological evaluation of endodontic files after cleaning and steam sterilization procedures. Aust Dent J. 2004; 49(3): 1227.
10. Boyd KS, Sonntag KD, Crawford JJ. Efficacy of sterilization of endodontic files after autoclaving in a synthetic sponge. Int Endod J. 1994 ; 27(6): 3303.
11. Venkatasubramanian R, Das UM, Bhatnagar S. Comparison of the effectiveness of sterilizing endodontic files by 4 differents methods. An in vitro study. J Indian Soc Pedod Prev Dent. 2010 JanMar;28(1):25.
12. Perakaki K, Mellor AC, Qualtrough AJ. Comparison of an ultrasonic cleaner and a washer disinfector in the cleaning of endodontic files. J Hosp Infect. 2007; 67(4): 3559.
13. Vassey M, Budge C, Poolman T, Jones P, Perrett D, Nayuni N, Bennett P, Groves P, Smith A, Fulford M, Marsh PD, Walker JT, Sutton JM, Raven ND. A quantitative assessment of residual protein levels on dental instruments reprocessed by manual, ultrasonic and automated cleaning methods. Br Dent J. 2011 May 14;210(9):E14.
14. Kuritani RH, McDonald NJ, Sydiskis RJ. Effect of sterilization on contaminated sponges. J Endod. 1993; 19(2): 6870.
This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY 4.0). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms. © 2024.
