Comparison of Antimicrobial Effect of Berberine as an Endodontic Irrigant with that of Other Common Root Canal Irrigants on Three Microorganisms Involved in Persistent Endodontic Infections
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background and Aim: The present study investigated the antimicrobial effect of Berberine as an endodontic irrigant on the microorganisms involved in persistent endodontic infections. In this experimental in vitro trial, organisms Enterococcus Faecalis, Staphylococcus Aureus, and Staphylococcus Epidermidis were assessed in a multi-species biofilm tooth model. Methods: Seventy-five single-rooted anterior teeth were collected and standardized to a length of 10mm. The teeth were randomly assigned into 5 groups. The teeth were then autoclaved to confirm being sterile. Afterwards, a biofilm consisting of the three selected bacteria was inoculated into the teeth and they were incubated for 21 days. Results: The comparison of the amount of reduction in viable bacterial counts after irrigation by different solutions among the groups was done by Kruskal-wallis test while the changes of viable bacterial counts before and after irrigation with each solution was done by Wilocoxon Signed Ranks test. No significant difference existed among the studied irrigation solutions regarding the mean reduction of total viable bacterial counts, neither did it exist regarding the viable staphylococcus aureus, staphylococcus epidermidis or Enterococcus faecalis counts after irrigation. MIC of berberine against staphylococcus aureus, staphylococcus epidermidis and Enterococcus faecalis species were 0.5ug/ml, 0.03ug/ml and 1ug/ml, respectively. These values were found to be 0.39ug/ml, 0.09ug/ml and 0.78ug/ml for NaOCl and 0.04ug/ml, 0.04ug/ml and 0.09ug/ml for chlorhexidine, respectively. Conclusion: it is concluded that Berberine can be used as a natural alternative instead of conventional root canal irrigants. However, more studies are required in order to confirm that characteristics of this substance are appropriate from other aspects.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".