Evaluation of the in vitro antimicrobial activity of alcoholic solution and aqueous extract of bee propolis against enterococcus faecalis
dc.contributor.author | Só, Marcus Vinicius Reis | pt_BR |
dc.contributor.author | Volpato, Cristiane | pt_BR |
dc.contributor.author | Só, Bruna Barcelos | pt_BR |
dc.contributor.author | Bruggemann, Rafaela | pt_BR |
dc.contributor.author | Kopper, Patrícia Maria Poli | pt_BR |
dc.contributor.author | Pereira, Jefferson Ricardo | pt_BR |
dc.date.accessioned | 2015-11-25T02:40:25Z | pt_BR |
dc.date.issued | 2015 | pt_BR |
dc.identifier.issn | 2317-5907 | pt_BR |
dc.identifier.uri | http://hdl.handle.net/10183/130261 | pt_BR |
dc.description.abstract | AIM:' The' purpose' of' this' study' was' to' analyze' the' in' vitro' antimicrobial'activity'of'aqueous'and'alcoholic'extracts'of'propolis'at' 1%' and' 3%' concentrations' against' Enterococcus' faecalis' (ATCC®' 19433).' MATERIAL' AND' METHODS:' Initially,' the' microbial' suspension'was'seeded'in'a'Brain'Heart'Infusion'Agar'(BHIA)'culture' medium,' distributed' in' 20' Petri' dishes.' Then,' 4' soaked' filter' paper' discs' were' placed' on' the' surface' of' the' inoculated'medium'of' each' plate'for'1'minute'in'1'mL'of'the'following'substances:'C+'(positive' control,' n=20):' 2%' ' chlorhexidine' gel;' CE' (negative' control,' n=20):' saline' solution;' S1' (n=10):' 1%' bee' propolis' alcoholic' solution;' S2' (n=10):'3%'bee'propolis'alcoholic'solution;'E1'(n=10):'1%'aqueous' propolis'extract;'E2'(n=10):'3%'aqueous'propolis'extract.'One'filter' paper'disc'of'each'(C+,'CE,'S1'and'S2)'was'placed'in'a'set'of'10'Petri' dishes,'whereas'one'filter'paper'disc'of'each'(C+,'CE,'E1'and'E2)'was' placed' in' the' other' set' of' 10' Petri' dishes.' RESULTS:' The' results' obtained' after' incubation' at' 37°C' for' 24' hours' under' microaerobic' conditions'revealed'that'S2'showed'higher'mean'levels'of'microbial' growth' inhibition' as' compared' to' E1,' E2' and' S1.' There' were' no' significantly'statically'differences'between'the'groups,'except'for'the' S2' group' and'CE' group.'Mean' levels' in' all'other' groups'were' lower' than' in' the' C+' group.' CONCLUSION:' The' study' concluded' that' 1%' and' 3%' bee' propolis' alcoholic' solution' had' lower' antibacterial' activity' against' Enterococcus' faecalis' as' compared' to' 2%' chlorhexidine'gel. | en |
dc.format.mimetype | application/pdf | |
dc.language.iso | eng | pt_BR |
dc.relation.ispartof | Journal of Research in Dentistry. Tubarão, SC. Vol. 3, no. 1 (Jan./Feb. 2015), p. 576-582 | pt_BR |
dc.rights | Open Access | en |
dc.subject | Endodontics | en |
dc.subject | Endodontia | pt_BR |
dc.subject | Chemical substances | en |
dc.subject | Própole | pt_BR |
dc.subject | Bee propolis | en |
dc.subject | Anti-infecciosos | pt_BR |
dc.title | Evaluation of the in vitro antimicrobial activity of alcoholic solution and aqueous extract of bee propolis against enterococcus faecalis | pt_BR |
dc.type | Artigo de periódico | pt_BR |
dc.identifier.nrb | 000975909 | pt_BR |
dc.type.origin | Nacional | pt_BR |
Este item está licenciado na Creative Commons License
-
Artigos de Periódicos (39096)Ciências da Saúde (10544)