"Descrizione" by A_Partyns (12876 pt) | 2020-Apr-15 15:38 |
Evaluation | N. Experts | Evaluation | N. Experts |
---|---|---|---|
1 | 6 | ||
2 | 7 | ||
3 | 8 | ||
4 | 9 | ||
5 | 10 |
Sodium hypochlorite is a chlorine-based chemical compound that is commonly used as a bleaching and disinfectant and it gives off a strong chlorine smell.
The effectiveness of sodium hypochlorite in disinfection and cleaning depends on the available chlorine concentration and the pH of the solution.
This compound is also used, at 0.5%, as an antiseptic in infected skin lesions and is known to reduce pathogenic bacteria in the food industry, in hospitals, in the home, in agriculture.
Sodium hypochlorite is considered a source of hypochlorous acid, which is produced by a myeloperoxidase expressed in professional phagocytes such as macrophages (1).
Its antimicrobial and tissue dissolution characteristics have made it an ideal candidate in endodontics preferable to chlorhexidine which has no tissue dissolution capacity (2).
Safety
This study examines in parallel the mechanisms of cytotoxicity through which sodium hypochlorite and the chloramines generated by it induce oxidative damage to the tissues (3) .
Ipoclorito di sodio approfondimenti
Molecular Formula: NaClO
Molecular Weight: 74.44 g/mol
CAS: 7681-52-9
EC Number: 231-668-3
UNII DY38VHM5OD
DSSTox Substance ID: DTXSID8021276
References_____________________________________________________________
(1) Mourenza Á, Collado C, Bravo-Santano N, Gil JA, Mateos LM, Letek M. The extracellular thioredoxin Etrx3 is required for macrophage infection in Rhodococcus equi. Vet Res. 2020;51(1):38. Published 2020 Mar 10. doi:10.1186/s13567-020-00763-3
(2) White RR, Hays GL, Janer LR. Residual antimicrobial activity after canal irrigation with chlorhexidine. J Endod. 1997;23(4):229–231. doi:10.1016/S0099-2399(97)80052-011223344
(3) Hidalgo E, Bartolome R, Dominguez C. Cytotoxicity mechanisms of sodium hypochlorite in cultured human dermal fibroblasts and its bactericidal effectiveness. Chem Biol Interact. 2002;139(3):265–282. doi:10.1016/s0009-2797(02)00003-0
Evaluate |