A Novel Approach to Gutta-Percha Disinfection: Evaluating Hypochlorous Acid Against Standard Endodontic Disinfectants

Volume 13 , Issue 1 , April 2026 , Pages 1-8

Authors

Didar Hama Gharib 1 ; Safeen Mahmood 2

1 university of Sulaimani, College of Dentistry, Operative Dentistry and Endodontics, As Sulaimaniyah , Iraq

2 University of Sulaimani, Basic Medical Sciences, College of Medicine, As Sulaymaniyah, Iraq

DOI logo 10.17656/sdj.10216

Keywords

Abstract

Objective: It is advisable to decontaminate gutta-percha cones before their insertion into the root canal system. The prevalence of contamination remains a contentious issue. This study aimed to assess and compare the effectiveness of several chemical agents for disinfecting gutta-percha cones (GP).

Methods: One hundred and ninety size F3 GP cones were used. The cones were contaminated with Enterococcus faecalis and Candida albicans following immersion. Three chemical agents were used: 2% chlorhexidine gluconate (CHX), 5.25% sodium hypochlorite (NaOCl), and 200ppm hypochlorous acid (HOCL). GP cones were immersed in the chemical agents for periods of 1 and 5 minutes. Following disinfection, the cones were incubated in thioglycolate broth, and the turbidity of the medium was used to indicate bacterial growth.

Results: CHX and NaOCl showed time-dependent regrowth of both microbes after short (1-minute) exposures; only a 5-minute NaOCl exposure achieved sustained bacterial elimination. In contrast, 200 ppm HOCl demonstrated immediate and complete eradication of both pathogens with all exposure times, showing no regrowth over 14 days.

Conclusions: HOCl proved superior to CHX and NaOCl, exhibiting rapid, stable, and prolonged antimicrobial efficacy without significant reduction over time.

پوختە

ئامانجەکان: پاککردنەوە و بێمیکڕۆبکردنی کونەکانی گوتا پەرچا پێش دانانیان لە ناو سیستەمی کاناڵی ڕەگدا پێویست و گرنگ دادەنرێت .هەرچۆنە، ڕێژەی پیسبوونی ئەم کونانە هێشتا بابەتێکی ناکۆکییە لە نێوان توێژینەوەکاندا. ئەم توێژینەوەیە بە ئامانجی هەڵسەنگاندن و بەراوردکردنی کاریگەری چەند ماددەی کیمیایی بۆ بێمیکڕۆبکردنی کونەکانی گوتا پەرچا (GP) ئەنجام درا.

ڕێگاکان: لە کۆی 190 کونەی GP لە قەبارەی F3 بەکارهێنران. کونەکان بە ڕێگەی خستنە ناو کۆلۆنییەکانی Enterococcus, Faecalis, Candida albicans بە شێوەی تاقیکاری پیسکران. سێ ماددەی کیمیایی بۆ بێمیکڕۆبکردن بەکارهێنران: 2٪ کلۆرهێکسیدین گلوکۆنات(CHX) ، ٪5.25 سۆدیۆم هایپۆکلۆرایت(NaOCl) ، و 200 ppmهایپۆکلۆرۆس ئاسید (HOCl). کونەکان بۆ ماوەی 1 و 5 خولەک لە ناو ئەم ماددانەدا دانران. دوای پرۆسەی بێمیکڕۆبکردن، کونەکان لە ناو بڕۆسی تیۆگلیکۆلاتدا کشتدران و تێکدانی زەلالی بۆ دیاریکردنی بوونی گەشەی میکڕۆبی بەکارهێنرا.

ئەنجامەکان: CHX و NaOCl گەشەکردنەوەی باکتریا و قارچیان پیشان دا، بە تایبەتی دوای بەرکەوتنی کورتخایەنی 1 خولەک، و کاریگەرییان بە شێوەی وابەستە بە کات بوو. تەنها NaOCl لە ماوەی 5 خولەکدا توانای لەناوبردنی پایەدارى میکڕۆبی نیشان دا. بە پێچەوانەوە، HOCl بە ڕێژەی 200 ppmلە هەموو ماوەکانی بەرکەوتندا توانای لەناوبردنی خێرا و تەواوی هەردوو پاتۆجینی هەبوو، و هیچ گەشەکردنەوەیەکی میکڕۆبی لە ماوەی 14 ڕۆژی چاودێریدا تۆمار نەکرا.

دەرئەنجامەکان: HOCl لە هەردوو ماددەی CHX و NaOCl باشتر بوو، چونکە کاریگەری دژە میکڕۆبی خێرا، پایەدار و درێژخایەنی پیشان دا، بێ ئەوەی لە ماوەی کاتدا کەمبوونەوەیەکی بەرچاو لە کاریگەرییەکەیدا ڕووبدات.

References

  1. Ahmad SM. Evaluation of Gutta-Percha Removal by Orange Oil Solvent and Eucalyptus Solvents Using Protaper Universal and XP-Endo® Rise Retreatment Instrument (An Invitro Comparative Study). Sulaimani Dent J. 2024;11(3):50-8.
  2. Abdulrahman SS, Faraj BM. Comparative analysis of conventional, sonic and laser activated irrigation methods on fracture resistance of endodontically treated roots: an in vitro study. Sulaimani Dent J. 2023;10(3):31-40.
  3. Sundqvist G, Figdor D, Persson S, Sjögren U. Microbiologic analysis of teeth with failed endodontic treatment and the outcome of conservative re-treatment. Oral Surgery, Oral Medicine, Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endodontol. 1998;85(1):86-93.
  4. Stuart CH, Schwartz SA, Beeson TJ, Owatz CB. Enterococcus faecalis: its role in root canal treatment failure and current concepts in retreatment. J Endod. 2006;32(2):93-8.
  5. Waltimo TMT, Sen BH, Meurman JH, Ørstavik D, Haapasalo MPP. Yeasts in apical periodontitis. Crit Rev Oral Biol Med. 2003;14(2):128-37.
  6. Nair PNR. Pathogenesis of apical periodontitis and the causes of endodontic failures. Crit Rev Oral Biol Med. 2004;15(6):348-81.
  7. Vishwanath V, Rao HM. Gutta-percha in endodontics-A comprehensive review of material science. J Conserv Dent. 2019;22(3):216-22.
  8. Short RD, Dorn SO, Kuttler S. The crystallization of sodium hypochlorite on gutta-percha cones after the rapid-sterilization technique: an SEM study. J Endod. 2003;29(10):670-3.
  9. de Almeida Gomes BPF, Vianna ME, Matsumoto CU, Zaia AA, Ferraz CCR, de Souza Filho FJ. Disinfection of gutta-percha cones with chlorhexidine and sodium hypochlorite. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2005;100(4):512-7.
  10. Valera MC, Silva KCG da, Maekawa LE, Carvalho CAT, Koga-Ito CY, Camargo CHR, et al. Antimicrobial activity of sodium hypochlorite associated with intracanal medication for Candida albicans and Enterococcus faecalis inoculated in root canals. J Appl Oral Sci. 2009;17(6):555-9.
  11. Zehnder M. Root canal irrigants. J Endod. 2006;32(5):389-98.
  12. Basrani B, Tjäderhane L, Santos JM, Pascon E, Grad H, Lawrence HP, et al. Efficacy of chlorhexidine-and calcium hydroxide–containing medicaments against Enterococcus faecalis in vitro. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2003;96(5):618-24.
  13. Rossi‐Fedele G, Guastalli AR, Doğramacı EJ, Steier L, De Figueiredo JAP. Influence of pH changes on chlorine‐containing endodontic irrigating solutions. Int Endod J. 2011;44(9):792-9.
  14. Basrani BR, Manek S, Sodhi RNS, Fillery E, Manzur A. Interaction between sodium hypochlorite and chlorhexidine gluconate. J Endod. 2007;33(8):966-9.
  15. Wang L, Bassiri M, Najafi R, Najafi K, Yang J, Khosrovi B, et al. Hypochlorous acid as a potential wound care agent: part I. Stabilized hypochlorous acid: a component of the inorganic armamentarium of innate immunity. J Burns Wounds. 2007;6:e5.
  16. Sakarya S, Gunay N, Karakulak M, Ozturk B, Ertugrul B. Hypochlorous acid: an ideal wound care agent with powerful microbicidal, antibiofilm, and wound healing potency. Wounds. 2014;26(12):342-50.
  17. Fukuzaki S. Mechanisms of actions of sodium hypochlorite in cleaning and disinfection processes. Biocontrol Sci. 2006;11(4):147–57.
  18. Selkon JB, Cherry GW, Wilson JM, Hughes MA. Evaluation of hypochlorous acid washes in the treatment of chronic venous leg ulcers. J Wound Care. 2006;15(1):33-7.
  19. Block MS, Rowan BG. Hypochlorous acid: a review. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2020;78(9):1461-6.
  20. Siqueira Jr JF, Rôças IN, Favieri A, Lima KC. Chemomechanical reduction of the bacterial population in the root canal after instrumentation and irrigation with 1%, 2.5%, and 5.25% sodium hypochlorite. J Endod. 2000;26(6):331-4.
  21. Zandi H, Rodrigues RC V, Kristoffersen AK, Enersen M, Mdala I, Ørstavik D, et al. Antibacterial effectiveness of 2 root canal irrigants in root-filled teeth with infection: a randomized clinical trial. J Endod. 2016;42(9):1307-13.
  22. Basrani B, Santos JM, Tjäderhane L, Grad H, Gorduysus O, Huang J, et al. Substantive antimicrobial activity in chlorhexidine-treated human root dentin. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2002;94(2):240-5.
  23. Gomes BPFA, Vianna ME, Zaia AA, Almeida JFA, Souza-Filho FJ, Ferraz CCR. Chlorhexidine in endodontics. Braz Dent J. 2013;24(2):89-102.
  24. Block SS. Disinfection, sterilization, and preservation. Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2001.
  25. McDonnell G, Russell AD. Antiseptics and disinfectants: activity, action, and resistance. Clin Microbiol Rev. 1999;12(1):147-79.
Statistics
  • Article view328
  • Downloads11
  • First online1 April 2026
  • Published at1 April 2026

  • RIS
  • BibTeX
  • EndNote
  • Mendeley
  • APA (7th edition)
  • MLA (9th edition)
  • Chicago
  • Harvard
  • IEEE
  • Vancouver