In vitro antibacterial effects of glassionomer cement containing ethanolic extract of propolis on Streptococcus mutans

Nursen Topcuoglu; Fatih Ozan; Mustafa Ozyurt; Guven Kulekci

doi:10.1055/s-0039-1698983

European Journal of Dentistry, Table of Contents

CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 · Eur J Dent 2012; 06(04): 428-433
DOI: 10.1055/s-0039-1698983

Original Article

Dental Investigation Society

In vitro antibacterial effects of glassionomer cement containing ethanolic extract of propolis on Streptococcus mutans

Nursen Topcuoglu

¹Department of Microbiology, Faculty of Dentistry, Istanbul University, Istanbul, TURKIYE

,

Fatih Ozan

²Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Faculty of Dentistry, Abant Izzet Baysal University, Bolu, TURKIYE

,

Mustafa Ozyurt

³Department of Microbiology and Clinical Microbiology, Gülhane Military Medical Academy, Haydarpasa Training Hospital, Istanbul, TURKIYE

,

Guven Kulekci

¹Department of Microbiology, Faculty of Dentistry, Istanbul University, Istanbul, TURKIYE

› Author Affiliations

Abstract

PDF Download

ABSTRACT

Objective: The aim of this study was to evaluate the antibacterial property of glass-ionomer cement (GIC) containing propolis against Streptococcus mutans and its effect on the in vitro S. mutans biofilm formation.

Methods: Ethanolic extract of propolis (EEP) was prepared at two concentrations as 25 and 50%. Three different experimental GIC disks were prepared using pure liquid and liquid solutions diluted with 25 and 50 percent of EEP concentrations. Minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) of EEP on the growth of S. mutans ATCC 25175 was determined by using agar dilution method. Agar diffusion test and an in vitro S. mutans biofilm assay for GIC disks with and without EEP were performed

Results: MIC values of Turkish propolis for S. mutans ATCC 25175 was found as 25 μg/mL. Experimental GICs containing propolis exhibited inhibition zones and their dry biofilm weights were less than the pure GIC. The bacterial density was lower in the GIC containing 50% EEP.

Conclusions: A distinct antibacterial and antibiofilm efficacy of propolis containing GIC on S. mutans has been observed. Although further research is needed to show clinical results, antibacterial GIC containing propolis would be a promising material for restoration. (Eur J Dent 2012;6:428-433)

Key words

Propolis - Streptococcus mutans - glass-ionomer cement - biofilm formation - antibacterial effect

PDF (203 kb)

References

References
1 Kumazawa S, Hamasaka T, Nakayama T. Antioxidant activity of propolis of various geographic origins. Food Chem 2004;84:329-339.
2 Kujumgiev A, Tsvetkova I, Serkedjieva Y, Bankova V, Chistov R, Popov S. Antibacterial, antifungal and antiviral activity of propolis of different geographic origin. J Ethnopharmacol 1999;64:235-240.
3 Russo A, Cardile V, Sanchez F, Troncoso N, Vanella A, Garbarion JA. Chilean propolis: antioxidant activity and antiproliferative action in human tumor cell lines. Life Sci 2004;76:545-558.
4 Drago L, Mombelli B, De Vecchi E, Fassina MC, Tocalli L, Gismondo MR. In vitro antimicrobial activity of propolis drug extract. J Chemother 2000;12:390-395.
5 Takaisi-Kikuni NB, Schilcher H. Electron microscopic and microcalorimetric investigations of the possible mechanism of the antibacterial action of a defined propolis provenance. Planta Med 1994;60:222-227.
6 Santos FA, Bastos EM, Uzeda M, Carvalho MA, Farias LM, Moreira ES, Braga FC. Antibacterial activity of Brazilian propolis and fractions against oral anaerobic bacteria. J Ethnopharmacol 2002;80:1-7.
7 Park YK, Koo H, Abreu JA, Ikegaki M, Cury JA, Rosalen PL. Antimicrobial activity of propolis on oral microorganisms. Current Microbiology 1998;36:24-28.
8 Koo H, Rosalen PL, Cury JA, Ambrosano GM, Murata RM, Yatsuda R, Ikegaki M, Alencar SM, Park YK. Effect of a new variety of Apis mellifera propolis on mutans streptococci. Current Microbiology 2000;41:192-196.
9 Koo H, Rosalen PL, Cury JA, Park YK, Ikegaki M, Sattler A. Effect of Apis mellifera propolis from two Brazilian regions on caries development in desalivated rats. Caries Res 1999;33:393-400.
10 Koo H, Pearson SK, Scott-Anne K, Abranches J, Cury JA, Rosalen PL, Park YK, Marquis RE, Bowen WH. Effects of apigenin and tt-farnesol on glucosyltransferase activity, biofilm viability and caries development in rats. Oral Microbiol Immunol.2002;17:337-343.
11 Liberio SA, Pereira AL, Araujo MJ, Dutra RP, Nascimento FR, Monteiro-Neto V, Ribeiro MN, Gonçalves AG, Guerra RN. The potential use of propolis as a cariostatic agent and its actions on mutans group streptococci. J Ethnopharmacol 2009;125:1-9.
12 Marsh P, Martin MV. Oral Microbiology. Oxford: Wright, 1999.
13 Muzynski BL, Greener E, Jameson L, Malone WF. Fluoride release from glass ionomers used as luting agents. J Prosthet Dent 1988;60:41-44.
14 Rezk-Lega F, Ogaard B, Rolla G. Availability of fluoride from glassionomer luting cements in human saliva. Scand J Dent Res 1991;99:60-63.
15 Dunne SM, Goolnik JS, Millar BJ, Seddon RP. Caries inhibition by a resin-modified and a conventional glass ionomer cement, in vitro. J Dent 1996;24:91-94.
16 ten Cate JM, van Duinen RN. Hypermineralization of dentinal lesions adjacent to glass-ionomer cement restorations. J Dent Res 1995;74:1266-1271.
17 Mukai M, Ikeda M, Yanagihara T, Hara G, Kato K, Nakagaki H, Robinson C. Fluoride uptake in human dentine from glass-ionomer cement in vivo. Arch Oral Biol 1993;38:1093-1098.
18 Davis PH. Flora of Turkey and East Aegean Islands. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 1985.
19 Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute. Methods for Dilution Antimicrobial Susceptibility Tests for Bacteria that Grow Aerobically. Approved standard M7–A7, Pennsylvania: CLSI document; 2006.
20 Takahashi Y, Imazato S, Kaneshiro AV, Ebisu S, Frencken JE, Tay FR. Antibacterial effects and physical properties of glass-ionomer cements containing chlorhexidine for the ART approach. Dent Mater 2006;22:647-652.
21 Sermet B, Deger S, Balkaya MC, Kaya D, Kulekci G. The effect of different dental porcelain surface treatments on plaque formation. Key Engineering Materials 2004;264-268.
22 Herrera M, Castillo A, Baca P, Carrion P. Antibacterial activity of glass-ionomer restorative cements exposed to cavity-producing microorganisms. Oper Dent 1999;24:286-291.
23 Herrera M, Castillo A, Bravo M, Liebana J, Carrion P. Antibacterial activity of resin adhesives, glass ionomer and resin-modified glass ionomer cements and a compomer in contact with dentin caries samples. Oper Dent 2000;25:265-269.
24 Massara ML, Alves JB, Brandao PR. Atraumatic restorative treatment: clinical, ultrastructural and chemical analysis. Caries Res 2002;36:430-436.
25 Türkün LS, Türkün M, Ertugrul F, Ates M, Brugger S. Long-term antibacterial effects and physical properties of chlorhexidine-containing glass ionomer cement. J Esthet Restor Dent 2008;20:29-45.
26 Jedrychowski JR, Caputo AA, Kerper S. Antibacterial and mechanical properties of restorative materials combined with chlorhexidines. J Oral Rehabil 1983;10:373-381.
27 Ribeiro J, Ericson D. In vitro antibacterial effect of chlorhexidine added to glass-ionomer cements. Scand J Dent Res 1991;99: 533-540.
28 Sanders BJ, Gregory RL, Moore K, Avery DR. Antibacterial and physical properties of resin modified glass-ionomers combined with chlorhexidine. J Oral Rehabil 2002;29:553–558.
29 Frencken JE, Imazato S, Toi C, Mulder J, Mickenautsch S, Takahashi Y, Ebisu S. Antibacterial effects of chlorhexidine containing glass ionomer cement in vivo A pilot study. Caries Res 2007;41:102-107.
30 Deepalakshmi M, Poorni S, Miglani R, Rajamani I, Ramachandran S. Evaluation of the antibacterial and physical properties of glass ionomer cements containing chlorhexidine and cetrimide: an in-vitro study. Indian J Dent Res 2010;21:552-556.
31 Duarte S, Rosalen PL, Hayacibara MF, Cury JA, Bowen WH, Marquis RE, Rehder VL, Sartoratto A, Ikegaki M, Koo H. The influence of a novel propolis on mutans streptococci biofilms and caries development in rats. Arch Oral Biol 2006;51:15-22.
32 Özan F, Sümer Z, Polat ZA, Er K, Özan U, Deger H. Effect of propolis containing mouthrinse on oral microorganisms and human gingival fibroblasts. Eur J Dent 2007;1:195-201.
33 Kartal M, Yildiz S, Kaya S, Kurucu S, Topcu G. Antimicrobial activity of propolis samples from two different regions of Anatolia. J Ethnopharmacol 2003;86:69-73.
34 Silici S, Kutluca S. Chemical composition and antibacterial activity of propolis collected by three different races of honeybees in the same region. J Ethnopharmacol 2005;99:69-73.
35 Sonmez S, Kirilmaz L, Yucesoy M, Yucel B, Yilmaz B. The effects of bee propolis on oral pathogens and human gingival fibroblasts. J Ethnopharmacol 2005;102:71-76.
36 Uzel A, Sorkun K, Oncag O, Cogulu D, Gencay O, Salih B. Chemical compositions and antimicrobial activities of four different Anatolian propolis samples. Microbiol Res 2005;160:189-195.
37 Gibbsons RJ, Houte J. On the formation of dental plaques. J Periodontol 1973;44:347-360.