Abstract
Aim: The purpose of this study was to compare the antibacterial and antifungal activity of MTA Fillapex with AH 26, AH Plus, and RealSeal root canal sealers. S. aureus, E. faecalis, and C. albicans were used as test microorganisms with the agar-diffusion test (ADT) and the direct contact test (DCT). 
 Methodology: For the ADT, 48 Mueller-Hinton plates were divided into 3 groups according to the microorganism used. Each group was then divided into 4 subgroups according to root canal sealer. Mueller-Hinton and Sabouraud agar mediums were preferred, and inhibition zones were measured to determine the antimicrobial efficacy at designated intervals. In the DCT, 96-well microtiter plates were used. For each microorganism and each sealer, 8 consecutive wells were prepared vertically on the plate. Microbial suspensions were allowed to directly contact the sealers in each well for 1 hour at 37°C. Subsequently, microbial growth was spectrophotometrically measured at set intervals for the freshly mixed and set forms.
 Results: A statistically significant difference was found between the tested root canal sealers for antimicrobial effectiveness (p < 0.05). According to the ADT results, all sealers had antimicrobial activity against the tested microorganisms. MTA Fillapex demonstrated satisfying results in the ADT against all microorganisms. In the DCT, MTA Fillapex inhibited bacterial and fungal growth in all freshly mixed and set forms. However, the set forms of AH 26 and AH Plus began to lose their antimicrobial activity on the tested microorganisms after a while.
 Conclusion: The results showed that the MTA-based root canal sealer MTA Fillapex may be a favorable alternative sealer against bacterial and/or fungal species in clinical practice.
 
 How to cite this article:
 Türkyılmaz A, Erdemir A. Antibacterial and antifungal activity of MTA-based root canal sealer versus epoxy resin-based and methacrylate resin-based sealers. Int Dent Res 2020;10(3):66-72. 
 https://doi.org/10.5577/intdentres.2020.vol10.no3.1
 
 Linguistic Revision: The English in this manuscript has been checked by at least two professional editors, both native speakers of English.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
