IJSR International Journal of Scientific Research 2277 - 8179 Indian Society for Health and Advanced Research ijsr-7-6-15647 Original Research Paper COMPARATIVE ANTIBACTERIAL ASSESSMENT OF ANTIBIOTIC BASED IRRIGANTS AGAINST ENTEROCOCCUS FAECALIS - AN IN VITRO STUDY Senthil Nathan Dr. Premkumar Elavarasu Dr. Deepak Dr. June 2018 7 6 01 02 ABSTRACT

 AIM:The aim of the study is to compare the efficacy of 4 different generations of cephalosporins as an irrigant in eliminating E.faecalis by various

antibacterial assays such as disc diffusion assay, tube dilution assay and finally colony forming units
METHODS:Sixty intact lower premolar teeth were selected for this study. The tooth was decoronated below cementoenamel junction. Each
specimen was individually packed in vials containing 5ml of BHI broth. The specimens were autoclaved at 121˚c for 15 lbs for 15 minutes
A total of 60 specimens were divided into 6 groups. The specimens were placed in 5 ml of the sterile BHI broth belonging to groups were chosen for
contamination with Enterococcus faecalis. From each vial 2ml of sterile BHI broth was discarded and replaced with 2ml of Enterococcus faecalis
suspension prepared as stated previously under sterile conditions. The inoculated vials were incubated at 37˚C for 14 days, each of the tooth
specimens was taken from each vial under sterile conditions and was rinsed with 5ml of sterile saline solution. 0.5% of the irrigating solutions were
inserted into the canal with sterile syringes and 27 gauge needle. The irrigation solution was allowed to remain for 10 minutes after with they were
removed using sterile paper points. The samples were diluted using sterile saline. 100μl of sample from each dilutions was spread out on to the
surface of BHI agar plates. The plates were incubated at 37˚C for an overnight period. After incubation the colonies were counted and expressed as
CFU/ML.
RESULTS:The results of the present study show group 2 (cefuroxime) with least antimicrobial activity against Enterococcus faecalis. Whereas,
group 3 (cefoperazone) had better antibacterial activity compared to group 2 (cefuroxime) but had less antimictobial property when compared to
group 1 (cephazolin) and group 4 (cefipime). Group 1 (cephzolin) had better antimicrobial property when compared with group 2 (cefuroxime) and
group 3 (cefoperazone). Group 4 (cefipime) had better inhibition of bacterial growth of all other groups used in this experiment.