The Effect of Gaseous Ozone in Infected Root Canal

  • Nexhmije Ajeti Department of Endodontic and Dental Pathology, Dental Branch, Faculty of Medicine, University of Prishtina, Prishtina, Kosovo
  • Teuta Pustina-Krasniqi Department of Prosthetic Dentistry, Dental Branch, Faculty of Medicine, University of Prishtina (UP), Vice Rector for International Affairs in UP, Prishtina, Kosovo
  • Sonja Apostolska Department of Endodontic and Dental Pathology, Dental Faculty, University of Skopje, Skopje
  • Edit Xhajanka Faculty of Dental Medicine, Prosthodontic Department, Tirana
Keywords: Antibacterial Effect, CHX, Gaseous Ozone, NaCl, NaOCl, Root Canal


OBJECTIVES: During the treatment of chronic apical periodontitis and pulp necrosis the main role is to irrigate the root canal.

AIM: The aim of this in vivo study was to irrigate with 0.9% NaCl (Natrium Chloride), 2.5 % NaOCl (Sodium Hypochlorite Solution, Sigma Aldrich - Germany) and 2% CHX (Chlorhexidine Digluconate Solution, Sigma Aldrich - Spain) combined with Gaseous Ozone (Prozone WH, Austria).

MATERIAL AND METHODS: This study was realised in the University Dentistry Clinical Centre of Kosovo (UDCCK), respectively in the Department of Endodontic and Dental Pathology, Dental Branch, Faculty of Medicine, Prishtina, Kosovo. The 40 subjects involved in this study belonged to both genders, in age between 15 -65 years. The sample selection was randomised. The retroalveolar radiography for each patient was taken in the suspected tooth. As a therapeutic plan the authors decided to disinfect the root canal with the irrigants, as follows: 2.5 % NaOCl, 2 % CHX and gaseous ozone.

RESULTS: The statistical analyses were based on Kruskal - Vallis test, X - test, DF = 3, r < 0.01. In the isolated average number of the aerobe and anaerobe bacteria colonies, when gaseous ozone was used, there was the significant statistical difference.

CONCLUSIONS: When gaseous ozone was combined with irrigants 0.9%, 2.5 % NaOCl and 2% CHX, it was concluded that the number of colonies of aerobic and anaerobic bacteria was reduced.


Download data is not yet available.


Metrics Loading ...

Plum Analytics Artifact Widget Block


Cheang GSP, Ho MWM. Oral Microbiol Immunol. 2001; 16:332-335.

Oliveira DP, Barbizam JV, Trope M, Texeira FB. In vitro antibacterial efficacy of endodontic irrigation in Enterococcus faecalis. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Path Oral Radiol Endod. 2007; 103(5):702-6. PMid:17368057

Peters OA, Laib A, Göhring TN, Barbakow F. Changes in root canal geometry after preparation assessed by high resolution computed tomography. Journal of Endodontic. 2001; 27(1):1-6. PMid:11487156

HÏ‹lsmann M, Hahn W. Complications during root canal irrigation: literature review and case reports (review). Int Endod J. 2003; 33:186-93.

Hϋlsmann M, RödigyT, Nordmeyer S. Complications during Root Canal Irrigation. Endod Topiccs. 2007; 16:27.

Spänberg L, Pascon EA. The importance of material preparation for the expression of citotoxicity during in vitro evaluation of biomaterials. J Endod. 1988; 14:247-50.

Baumgartner JC, Cuenin PR. Efficacacy of several concentrations of sodium hypochlorite for root canal irrigation. J Endod. 1992; 18:605-12.

Kaufman AY, Keila S. Hypersensitivity to sodium hypochlorite. J End. 1989; 15:224-6.

Rüsell AD, Day MJ. Antibacterial activity of chlorhexidine. J Hosp Infected. 1993; 25:229-38.

Brugnera A, Zanin F, Barbin EL, Spanó JC, Santana R, Pécora JD. Effects of Er:YAG laser irradiation on radicular dentine permeability using different irrigating solutions. Lasers Surg Med. 2003; 33(4):256-9. PMid:14571450

Ercan E, Öztekinci T, Atakul, Gül K. Antibacterial activity of 2% chlorhexidine gluconate and 5.25% sodium hypochlorite in infected root canal: in vivo study. J Endod. 2004; 30(2):84-7. PMid:14977302

Leonardo MR, Tanoмaru Filho M, Silva LA, Nelson Filho P, Bonifácio KC, Ito IY. In vivo antimicrobial activity of 2% chlorhexidine used as a root canal irrigating solution, J Endod. 1999; 25(3):167-71.

IJS German, Ozone Therapy in Dentistry. A Systematic Review. 2013.

Eidler V, Linetskiy I, Hubálková H, Staňková H, Šмucler R, Mazánek J. Ozone and Its Usage in General Medicine and Dentistry. A Review Article. Prague Medical Report. 2008; 109(1):5-13.

Mollica P, Harris P. Integrating oxygen/ozone therapy in to your practice, 2010.

Paraskeva P, Graham NJD. Ozonation of municipal wastewater effluens. Water Environment Research. 2002; 74:569-81. PMid:12540098

Hems RS, Gulabivala K, Ng-YL, Ready D, Spratt DA. An in vitro evaluation of the ability of ozone to kill a strain of Enteroccocus faecalis. International Endodontic Journal. 2005; 38:22-9. PMid:15606819

Alwadi J, Lamey PJ, Cunningham JL, Domingo H, Lynch E, Grootveld MC. Antimicrobial Efficacy of Ozone in Root Canal Treatment. International Association for Dental Research. 2008; 10-12.

Müller P, Goggenheim B, Schmidlin PR. Efficacy of gasiform ozone and photodynamic therapy on a multispecies oral biofilm in vitro: Eur J. Oral Sci. 2007; 115:77-80. PMid:17305720

Virtej AA, Colin RA, Wolggang H, Raab MA, Pfeffer K. Determination of the Performance of Various Root Canal Disinfection Methods after In Situ Carriage. Journal of Endodontics. 2007; 33(8):926-929. PMid:17878076

Jankovic B, Klaric E, Prskalo K, Marovic D, Pandurovic V, Tarle Z. Antimicrobial Effectiveness of Intracanal Ozone Treatment. Acta Stomatol Croat. 2013; 47(2):127-136.

How to Cite
Ajeti N, Pustina-Krasniqi T, Apostolska S, Xhajanka E. The Effect of Gaseous Ozone in Infected Root Canal. Open Access Maced J Med Sci [Internet]. 2018Feb.14 [cited 2020Dec.5];6(2):389-96. Available from:
D - Dental Sciences