Comparison of Antibacterial Properties of Three Different Dental Cements by Direct Contact Test

Document Type : Original Article

Authors

1 Department of Islamic Azad University ,Dental branch , Tehran, Iran.

2 Dentist.

Abstract

Background and Objective:  Antibacterial activity of cement materials can play an important role in caries prevention. The aim of this study is comparison of anti-bacterial properties of three different dental cement .
Subjects and Methods: The experimental study was undertaken to compare antibacterial properties of three dental cements: zinc phosphate (Harvard), zinc polycarboxylate (Harvard) and glass ionomer (GC) with 2 different powder/liquid ratios, while Streptococcus mutans suspension was placed directly on the cement. For the direct-contact test, micro titer plates were divided into 7  groups that contain 12 wells .6 groups of them were for two concentration of the three cements  and 1 group was for positive control. After coating the wells with tested cement, adding bacteria to the groups and 1 hour,1day,1 week and1month  after ancubation, optical density in each well were monitored  by using spectrophotomete..The data were subjected to repeated measure,1-way ANOVA and Tukey test .
Results: One hour, 1 day and 1 week after cementation, zinc phosphate and glass ionomer demonstrated antibacterial activity but zinc polycarboxylate did not show any antibacterial properties. In 1 month aged microtiter plate zinc phosphate and glass ionomer exhibited weaker antibacterial properties than before while zinc polycarboxylate cement did not show any antibacterial properties .The different concentration of cements , in 1 hour,1 day and 1 week  after cementations, had no effect on the antibacterial properties of tested cements. One month after aging the cements, outgrowth of bacteria in standard glass ionomer was more than  diluted glass ionomer .The same result was shown for zinc phosphate.
Conclusion: Zinc phosphate and glass inomer demonstrated antibacterial properties even after 1 month, while zinc polycarboxylate exhibited no antibacterial activity.

Keywords

References

1-Walton JN, Gardner FM, Agar JR. A survey of crown and fixed partial denture failures: Length of service and reasons for replacement. J Prosthet Dent 1986;56(4):416–21.
2-Palenik CJ, Behnen MJ, Setcos JC, Miller CH. Inhibition of microbial adherence and growth by various glass ionomers in vitro. Dent Mater 1992;8(1):16-20.  
3-Lewinstein I, Fuhrer N, Gelfand K, Cardash H, Pilo R. Retention, marginal leakage, and cament solubility of provisional crowns cemented with temporary cement containing stannous fluoride. Int J Prosthodont 2003;16(2):189–93.
4-Vermeersch G, Leloup G, Delmeé M, Vreven J. Antibacterial activity of glass–ionomer cements, compomers and resin composites: relationship between acidity and material setting phase. J Oral Rehabil 2005;32(5):368-74.
5-Brukiene V, Aleksejuniene J, Balciuniene I. Dental restorations quality in lithuanian adolescents. Stomatologija 2005;7(4):103-9.
6-Burke FJ, Wilson NH. When is caries caries, and what should we do about it? Quintessence Int 1998;29(10):668-72.
7-Loesche WJ. Role of Streptococcus mutans in human dental decay. Microbiol Rev 1986;50(4):353–80.
8-Van Houte J, Sansone C, Joshipura K, Kent R. In vitro acidogenic potential and mutans streptococci of human smooth-surface plaque associated with initial caries lesions and sound enamel. J Den Res 1991;70(12):1497–502.
9-Konradsson K, Claesson R, Dijken van JW. Mutans streptococci and lactobacilli in plaque on a leucite-reinforced dental ceramic and on a calcium aluminate cement. Clin Oral Investig 2006;10(3):175-80.
10-Lewinstein I, Matalon S, Slutzkey S, Weiss E. Antibacterial properties of aged dental cemens evaluated bi direct-contact and agar diffusion tests. J Prosthet Dent 2005;93:364-71.
11-Herrera M, Castillo A, Bravo M, Liébana J, Carrión P. Antibacterial activity of resin adhesive, glass ionomer, and resin-modified glass ionomer cements and a compomer in contact with dentin caries samples. Oper Dent 2000;25(4):265-9.
12-Hori R, Kohno S, Hoshino E. Bactericidal  eradication from carious lesion of prepared abutments by an antibacterial temporary cement. J  Prosthet Dent 1997;77(4):348–52 .
13-Loyola-Rodriguez JP, Garcia-Godoy F, Lindquist R. Growth inhibition of glass ionomer cements on mutans streptococci. Pediatr Dent 1994;16(5):346-9.
14-Coogan MM, Creaven PJ. Antibacterial properties of eight dental cements. Int Endod 1993;26(6):355-61.
15-Dahl BL. Antibacterial effect of two luting cements on prepared dentin in vitro and in vivo. Acta Odontol Scand 1978;36(6):363-9.
16-Da saliva RC, Zuanon AC, Spolidorio DM, Campos JA. Antibacterial activity of four glass ionomer cements used in atraumatic restorative treatment. J Mater Sci Mater Med 2007;18(9):1859-62.
17-Daugela P, Oziunas R, Zekonis G. Antibacterial potential of contemporary dental luting cements. Stomatologija 2008;10(1):16-21.
18-Forsten L. Short- and long-term fluoride release from glass ionomer based liners. Scand J Dent Res 1991;99(4):340-2.
19-Sheng J, Nguyen PT, Marquis RE. Multi-target antimicrobial actions of zinc against oral anaerobes. Arch Oral Biol 2005;50(8):747–57.
20- Diaz-Arnold AM, Vargas MA, Haselton DR. Current status of luting agents for fixed prosthodontics.J rosthet Dent. 1999 Feb;81(2):135-41.
21-Hiraishi N, Kitasako Y, Nikaido T, Foxton RM, Tagami J, Nomura S. Acidity of conventional luting cements and their diffusion through bovine dentine. Int Endod J 2003;36(9):622-8.
22-DeSchepper EJ, Thrasher MR, Thurmond BA. Antibacterial effects of light-cured liners. Am J Dent 1989;2(3):74–6
23 Hristov L DimitrovaS, MarkovaK, Kostova M. A comparative study of: solubility, pH and temperature changes taking place in several types of cements used in modern dentistry. J of IMAB 2006; 12(2):22-24.
 24-Koo H, Sheng J, Nguyen PT, Marquis RE. Co-operative inhibition by fluoride and zinc of glucosyl transferase production and polysaccharide synthesis by mutans streptococci in suspension cultures and biofilms. FEMS Microbiol Lett 2006;254(1):134–40.
25-Wiegand A, Buchalla W, Attin T. Review on fluoride-releasing restorative materials--fluoride release and uptake characteristics, antibacterial activity and influence on caries formation. Dent Mater 2007;23(3):343–62.
26-Imazato S, Torii Y, Takatsuka T, Inoue K, Ebi N, Ebisu S. Bactericidal effect of dentin primer containing antibacterial monomer methacryloyloxydodecylpyridinium bromide (MDPB) against bacteria in human carious dentin. J Oral Rehabil 2001;28(4):314-9.
27-Boyd D, Li H, Tanner DA, Towler MR, Wall JG. The antibacterial effects of zinc ion migration from zinc-based glass polyalkenoate cements. J Mater Sci Mater Med 2006;17(6):489– 94.
28-Phan TN, Buckner T, Sheng J, Baldeck JD, Marquis RE. Physiologic actions of zinc related to inhibition of acid and alkali production by oral streptococci in suspensions and biofilms. Oral Microbiol Immunol 2004;19(1):31–8.
Jundishapur Scientific Medical Journal
Volume 12, Issue 5 - Serial Number 86
July and August 2013
Pages 607-620

Files

History

  • Receive Date: 12 July 2009
  • Revise Date: 22 November 2011
  • Accept Date: 21 January 2012

Share

How to cite

Statistics