Related Experiment Video
Updated: May 16, 2026
An In Vitro Bladder Model of Catheter-Associated Urinary Tract Infection
Published on: June 24, 2025
Comparative study of the antimicrobial effect of three irrigant solutions (chlorhexidine, sodium hypochlorite and
Maryam Bidar1, Sepideh Hooshiar, Mahboubeh Naderinasab
1Dental Research Center, Faculty of Dentistry, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Mashhad, Iran.
Aim:
To compare the antimicrobial effect of 2% chlorhexidine, 2.5% sodium hypochlorite and MUMS containing 2% chlorhexidine.
Materials And Methods:
All of the above irrigants were examined on Enterococcus faecalis, Streptococcus mutans, Candida albicans, Lactobacillus casei and E. coli. A total of 0.5 CC of each solution and 0.5 CC of McFarland solution bacterium were added to each examination tube. After 15, 30 and 45 minutes, colony count was performed for each tube. The difference in the number of bacteria indicated the effect taken by disinfectant material.
Results:
MUMS containing chlorhexidine showed the antimicrobial properties just like chlorhexidine's effect against E. coli, Streptococcus mutans, Candida albicans, Enterococcus faecalis and Lactobacillus casei in preventing these entire microorganisms to incubate. Sodium hypochlorite was not effective against Enterococcus faecalis and Candida albicans incubated in 15, 30 and 45 minutes and Enterococcus faecalis in 15 minutes.
Conclusion:
MUMS has antimicrobial properties similar to chlorhexidine.
Clinical Significance:
As MUMS containing chlorhexidine can transfer chlorhexidine through its own surfactant around apical area and it can open the dentinal tubules by its own chelator for more penetration of chlorhexidine, it may be a choice for canal irrigation.
Insights
MUMS containing chlorhexidine exhibits antimicrobial effects comparable to chlorhexidine alone. This formulation may be a viable option for root canal irrigation due to enhanced penetration.
Area of Science:
- Microbiology
- Endodontics
- Biomaterials
Background:
- Antimicrobial efficacy is crucial for root canal disinfection.
- Chlorhexidine and sodium hypochlorite are common endodontic irrigants.
- Novel formulations aim to improve irrigant delivery and efficacy.
Purpose of the Study:
- To compare the antimicrobial activity of 2% chlorhexidine, 2.5% sodium hypochlorite, and MUMS containing 2% chlorhexidine.
- To evaluate the efficacy of these irrigants against key oral microorganisms.
Main Methods:
- Microorganisms tested: Enterococcus faecalis, Streptococcus mutans, Candida albicans, Lactobacillus casei, and E. coli.
- Standardized solutions and bacterial suspensions were incubated for 15, 30, and 45 minutes.
- Colony counts were performed to determine the antimicrobial effect of each irrigant.
Main Results:
- MUMS with chlorhexidine demonstrated antimicrobial properties against all tested microorganisms, similar to chlorhexidine alone.
- Sodium hypochlorite was less effective, particularly against Enterococcus faecalis and Candida albicans at various time points.
Conclusions:
- MUMS containing chlorhexidine possesses comparable antimicrobial efficacy to chlorhexidine.
- The surfactant and chelator properties of MUMS may enhance chlorhexidine penetration into dentinal tubules, suggesting its potential as a root canal irrigant.
Related Concept Videos
01:23Hand hygiene
Hand washing...
01:28Antimicrobial Effectiveness
01:30Urinary Tract Infection III: Diagnostic Studies and Interprofessional Care