Advances in Clinical and Experimental Medicine

Title abbreviation: Adv Clin Exp Med
JCR Impact Factor (IF) – 1.736
5-Year Impact Factor – 2.135
Index Copernicus  – 168.52
MEiN – 70 pts

ISSN 1899–5276 (print)
ISSN 2451-2680 (online)
Periodicity – monthly

Download original text (EN)

Advances in Clinical and Experimental Medicine

2019, vol. 28, nr 2, February, p. 243–248

doi: 10.17219/acem/78022

Publication type: original article

Language: English

Download citation:

  • BIBTEX (JabRef, Mendeley)
  • RIS (Papers, Reference Manager, RefWorks, Zotero)

A comparative assessment of the antibacterial activity of root canal sealers on 2 Actinomyces species: An in vitro study

Małgorzata Pawińska1,A,B,C,D,E,F, Elżbieta Łuczaj-Cepowicz2,A,B,C,D, Grzegorz Szczurko1,A,B,C,D, Anna Kierklo3,A,B,C, Grażyna Marczuk-Kolada3,C,D,E, Katarzyna Leszczyńska4,B,C,F

1 Department of Integrated Dentistry, Faculty of Medicine with the Division of Dentistry and Division of Medical Education in English, Medical University of Bialystok, Poland

2 Department of Pediatric Dentistry, Faculty of Medicine with the Division of Dentistry and Division of Medical Education in English, Medical University of Bialystok, Poland

3 Department of Dentistry Propedeutics, Faculty of Medicine with the Division of Dentistry and Division of Medical Education in English, Medical University of Bialystok, Poland

4 Department of Microbiology, Faculty of Medicine with the Division of Dentistry and Division of Medical Education in English, Medical University of Bialystok, Poland


Background. Actinomyces species have a low virulence and pathogenicity, but under specific circumstances they may be involved in root canal and periapical tissue infections.
Objectives. The aim of the study was to investigate the antibacterial activity of various root canal sealers on standardized strains of Actinomyces.
Material and Methods. The materials tested in this study included AH Plus™ Jet (AH), Apexit® Plus (AP), Endomethasone N (EN), GuttaFlow® (GF), Hybrid Root SEAL (HB), MTA Fillapex (FL), Real® Seal (RCS), Roeko Seal Automix (RSA), Sealapex™ (SP), and Tubli-Seal™ (TS). The antibacterial effect of the freshly mixed sealers on standardized strains of Actinomyces israelii NCTC 8047 and Actinomyces viscosus ATCC 15987 was evaluated with the use of the agar diffusion test (ADT). The results were obtained by measuring the diameter of the growth inhibition zone at 96 h and 1, 2, 3, and 4 weeks, and were analyzed in time using repeated measures analysis of variance (ANOVA). Statistically significant differences among the materials were determined by using one-way ANOVA and Tukey’s post hoc testing. A paired Student’s t-test was applied to compare the susceptibility of particular strains to each sealer. The critical level of significance for all tests was p < 0.05.
Results. Most sealers demonstrated growth inhibition zones against both tested bacteria, except for RSA and GF. Actinomyces viscosus was significantly more susceptible than A. israelii to AP, RCS (p < 0.001) and TS (p = 0.012). Actinomyces israelii was significantly more susceptible than A. viscosus to EN, HB and SP (p < 0.001).
Conclusion. The antimicrobial effect of the examined materials varied considerably depending on the type of material and bacterial species tested. Most of the tested root canal sealers exhibited antibacterial activity on standardized strains of Actinomyces, with FL showing the highest antibacterial effect on both bacterial strains. Importantly, both standardized strains of Actinomyces were characterized by varied sensitivity to root canal sealers.

Key words

Actinomyces, antibacterial agents, root canal sealers

References (31)

  1. Siqueira JF Jr. Periapical actinomycosis and infection with Propionibacterium propionicus. Endod Topics. 2003;6:78–95.
  2. Wang J, Jiang Y, Chen W, Zhu C, Liang J. Bacterial flora and extraradicular biofilm associated with the apical segment of teeth with post-treatment apical periodontitis. J Endod. 2012;38(7):954–959.
  3. Yamane K, Yamanaka TN, Ishihara K, et al. Pathogenicity of exopolysaccharide-producing Actinomycesoris isolated from an apical abscess lesion. Int Endod J. 2013;46(2):145–154.
  4. Nair PNR, Brundin M, Sundqvist G, Sjögren U. Building biofilms in vital host tissues: A survival strategy of Actinomyces radicidentis. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2008;106(4):595–603.
  5. Subramanian K, Mickel AK. Molecular analysis of persistent periradicular lesions and root ends reveals a diverse microbial profile. J Endod. 2009;35(7):950–957.
  6. Al-Ahmadi A, Ameen H, Pelz K, et al. Antibiotic resistance and capacity for biofilm formation of different bacteria isolated from endodontic infections associated with root-filled teeth. J Endod. 2014;40(2):223–230.
  7. Tennert C, Fuhrmann N, Wittmer A, et al. New bacterial composition in primary and persistent/secondary endodontic infections with respect to clinical and radiographic findings. J Endod. 2014;40(2):670–677.
  8. Signoretti FG, Endo MS, Brenda PF, et al. Persistent extraradicular infection in root-filled asymptomatic human tooth: Scanning electron microscopic analysis and microbial investigation after apical microsurgery. J Endod. 2011;37(12):1696–1700.
  9. Signoretti FG, Gomes PF, Montagner F, Jacinto RC. Investigation of cultivable bacteria isolated from longstanding retreatment-resistant lesions of teeth with apical periodontitis. J Endod. 2013;39(10):1240–1244.
  10. Rocas IN, Lima KC, Siqueira JF Jr. Reduction in bacterial counts in infected root canals after rotary or hand nickel–titanium instrumentation: A clinical study. Int Endod J. 2013;46(7):681–687.
  11. Hammad M, Qualtrough A, Silikas N. Evaluation of root canal obturation: A three-dimensional in vitro study. J Endod. 2009;35(4):541–544.
  12. Li G, Niu L, Zhang W, et al. Ability of new obturation materials to improve the seal of the root canal system: A review. Acta Biomater. 2014;10(3):1050–1063.
  13. Slutzky-Goldberg I, Slutzky H, Solomonov M, Moshonov J, Weiss EI, Matalon S. Antibacterial properties of four endodontic sealers. J Endod. 2008;34(6):735–738.
  14. Gjorgievska E, Apostolska S, Dimkov A, Nicholson JW, Kaftandzieva A. Incorporation of antimicrobial agents can be used to enhance the antibacterial effect of endodontic sealers. Dent Mater. 2013;29(3):29–34.
  15. Eldeniz AU, Erdemir A, Hadimli HH, Belli S, Erganis O. Assessment of antibacterial activity of EndoREZ. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2006;102(1):119–126.
  16. Bailon-Sanchez ME, Baca P, Ruiz-Linares M, Ferrer-Luque CM. Antibacterial and anti-biofilm activity of AH Plus with chlorhexidine and cetrimide. J Endod. 2014;40(2):977–981.
  17. Barros J, Silva MG, Rocas IN, et al. Antibiofilm effects of endodontic sealers containing quaternary ammonium polyethylenimine nanoparticles. J Endod. 2014;40(2):1167–1171.
  18. Zhang H, Shen Y, Ruse ND, Haapasalo M. Antibacterial activity of endodontic sealers by modified direct contact test against Enteroccocus faecalis. J Endod. 2009;35(4):1051–1055.
  19. Reszka P, Nowicka A, Lipski M, Dura W, Droździk A, Woźniak K. A comparative chemical study of calcium silicate-containing and epoxy resin-based root canal sealers. Biomed Res Int. 2016; 2016:9808432. doi: 10.1155/2016/9808432
  20. Faria-Junior NB, Tanomaru-Filho M, Berbert FL, Guerreiro-Tanomaru JM. Antibiofilm activity, pH and solubility of endodontic sealers. Int Endod J. 2013;46(8):755–762.
  21. Barbero-Navarro I, Galera-Ruiz H, Pereira M, Guerreiro D, Machuca-Portillo MC, López del Valle L. In vitro antimicrobial effects of 3 root canal sealers on Actinomyces radicidentis. P R Health Sci J. 2014;33(2):71–73.
  22. Cobankara FK, Altinoz HC, Erganis O, Kav K, Belli S. In vitro antibacterial activities of root canal sealers by using two different methods. J Endod. 2004;30(1):57–60.
  23. Morgental RD, Vier-Pelisser FV, Oliveira SD, Antunes FC, Cogo DM, Kopper PM. Antibacterial activity of two MTA-based root canal sealers. Int Endod J. 2011;44(12):1128–1133.
  24. Mohammadi Z, Shalavi S, Giardino L, Palazzi F, Mashouf RY, Soltanian A. Antimicrobial effect of three new and two established root canal irrigation solutions. Gen Dent. 2012;60(6):534–537.
  25. Estrela C, Sydney GB, Bammann LL, Felippe O Jr. Mechanism of action of calcium and hydroxyl ions of calcium hydroxide on tissue and bacteria. Braz Dent J. 1995;6(2):85–90.
  26. Sipert CR, Hussne RP, Nishiyama CK, Torres SA. In vitro antimicrobial activity of Fill Canal, Sealapex, Mineral Trioxide Aggregate, Portland cement and EndoRez. Int Endod J. 2005;38(8):539–543.
  27. Bouillaguet S, Wataha JC, Tay FR, Brackett MG, Lockwood PE. Initial in vitro biological response to contemporary endodontic sealers. J Endod. 2006;32(10):989–992.
  28. Nielsen BA, Beeler WJ, Vy C, Baumgartner JC. Setting times of resilon and other sealers in aerobic and anaerobic environments. J Endod. 2006;32(10):130–132.
  29. Barborka BJ, Woodmansey KF, Glickman GN, Schneiderman E, He J. Long-term clinical outcome of teeth obturated with Resilon. J Endod. 2017;43(4):556–560.
  30. Nawal RR, Parande M, Sehgal R, Naik A, Rao NR. A comparative evaluation of antimicrobial efficacy and flow properties for Epiphany, Guttaflow and AH-Plus sealer. Int Endod J. 2011;44(4):307–313.
  31. Gomes PF, Montagner F, Bellocchio Berber V, et al. Antimicrobial action of intracanal medicaments on the external root surface. J Dent. 2009;37(1):76–81.