Download PDF
CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 · Eur J Dent 2018; 12(02): 204-209
DOI: 10.4103/ejd.ejd_219_17
Original Article
European Journal of Dentistry

Esthetic restorative materials and glass ionomer cements: Influence of acidic drink exposure on bacterial adhesion

Claudio Poggio
1   Department of Clinical-Surgical, Diagnostic and Pediatric Sciences, Section of Dentistry, University of Pavia, Pavia, Italy
,
Lodovico Vialba
1   Department of Clinical-Surgical, Diagnostic and Pediatric Sciences, Section of Dentistry, University of Pavia, Pavia, Italy
,
Riccardo Marchioni
1   Department of Clinical-Surgical, Diagnostic and Pediatric Sciences, Section of Dentistry, University of Pavia, Pavia, Italy
,
Marco Colombo
1   Department of Clinical-Surgical, Diagnostic and Pediatric Sciences, Section of Dentistry, University of Pavia, Pavia, Italy
,
Giampiero Pietrocola
2   Department of Molecular Medicine, Unit of Biochemistry, University of Pavia, Pavia, Italy
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

Publication Date:
16 September 2019 (online)

Also available at
   Permissions and Reprints

ABSTRACT

Objective: The purpose of this research was to evaluate and compare bacterial adhesion on five esthetic restorative materials, three glass ionomer cements (GIC), and two GIC with coat. All the materials were considered after acidic drink exposure. Materials and Methods: Thirty cylindrical sample of each of the 10 materials were prepared and then divided into three groups: group 1 (baseline), Group 2 (1 day in acidic soft drink), and Group 3 (7 days in acidic soft drink). Bacterial suspension of Streptococcus mutans was cultured and deposited onto each material, and the adhesion was evaluated through the colony-forming units determination. One-way ANOVA and Bonferroni's post hoc tests were applied to estimate significant differences between the esthetic materials. Results: The highest amount of S. mutans was recorded in Group 3 and the lowest in Group 1 (baseline). In general, the GIC showed bacterial adhesion values higher than the ones related to composites both in Group 2 than in Group 3. Acidic soft drinks lead a time-dependent degradation of restorative materials causing an increase of the surface rugosity. In fact, a general increase in S. mutans cells adhesion to treated samples was observed. Conclusions: The use of acidic soft drink resulted in a degradation of the surface layer of the restorative material with consequent increase of bacterial adhesion. The GIC can be considered a more friendly environment for bacterial adhesion. This is true in particular if acid substances have already deteriorated the surface.

Key words:

Acidic drinks - esthetic restorative materials - glass ionomer cement - Streptococcus mutans
 

  • REFERENCES

  • 1 Fúcio SB, Paula AB, Sardi JC, Duque C, Correr-Sobrinho L, Puppin-Rontani RM. et al. Streptococcus mutans biofilm influences on the antimicrobial properties of glass ionomer cements. Braz Dent J 2016; 27: 681-7
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 2 Naik RG, Dodamani AS, Khairnar MR, Jadhav HC, Deshmukh MA. Comparative assessment of antibacterial activity of different glass ionomer cements on cariogenic bacteria. Restor Dent Endod 2016; 41: 278-82
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 3 Wang SP, Ge Y, Zhou XD, Xu HH, Weir MD, Zhang KK. et al. Effect of anti-biofilm glass-ionomer cement on Streptococcus mutans biofilms. Int J Oral Sci 2016; 8: 76-83
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 4 Rai N, Naik R, Gupta R, Shetty S, Singh A. Evaluating the effect of different conditioning agents on the shear bond strength of resin-modified glass ionomers. Contemp Clin Dent 2017; 8: 604-12
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 5 Fan C, Chu L, Rawls HR, Norling BK, Cardenas HL, Whang K. et al. Development of an antimicrobial resin – A pilot study. Dent Mater 2011; 27: 322-8
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 6 Opdam NJ, van de Sande FH, Bronkhorst E, Cenci MS, Bottenberg P, Pallesen U. et al. Longevity of posterior composite restorations: A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Dent Res 2014; 93: 943-9
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 7 Beyth N, Domb AJ, Weiss EI. An in vitro quantitative antibacterial analysis of amalgam and composite resins. J Dent 2007; 35: 201-6
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 8 de Alencar E, Silva Leite ML, da Cunha Medeiros E, Silva FD, Meireles SS, Duarte RM, Andrade AK. The effect of drinks on color stability and surface roughness of nanocomposites. Eur J Dent 2014; 8: 330-6
    Thieme ConnectPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 9 Ceci M, Viola M, Rattalino D, Beltrami R, Colombo M, Poggio C. et al. Discoloration of different esthetic restorative materials: A spectrophotometric evaluation. Eur J Dent 2017; 11: 149-56
    Thieme ConnectPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 10 Derchi G, Vano M, Barone A, Covani U, Diaspro A, Salerno M. et al. Bacterial adhesion on direct and indirect dental restorative composite resins: An in vitro study on a natural biofilm. J Prosthet Dent 2017; 117: 669-76
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 11 Park JW, Song CW, Jung JH, Ahn SJ, Ferracane JL. The effects of surface roughness of composite resin on biofilm formation of Streptococcus mutans in the presence of saliva. Oper Dent 2012; 37: 532-9
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 12 Deligeorgi V, Mjör IA, Wilson NH. An overview of reasons for the placement and replacement of restorations. Prim Dent Care 2001; 8: 5-11
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 13 Xie D, Weng Y, Guo X, Zhao J, Gregory RL, Zheng C. et al. Preparation and evaluation of a novel glass-ionomer cement with antibacterial functions. Dent Mater 2011; 27: 487-96
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 14 Busscher HJ, Bos R, van der Mei HC. Initial microbial adhesion is a determinant for the strength of biofilm adhesion. FEMS Microbiol Lett 1995; 128: 229-34
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 15 Poggio C, Arciola CR, Rosti F, Scribante A, Saino E, Visai L. et al. Adhesion of Streptococcus mutans to different restorative materials. Int J Artif Organs 2009; 32: 671-7
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 16 Erdemir U, Yildiz E, Eren MM, Ozel S. Surface hardness evaluation of different composite resin materials: Influence of sports and energy drinks immersion after a short-term period. J Appl Oral Sci 2013; 21: 124-31
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 17 Poggio C, Dagna A, Chiesa M, Colombo M, Scribante A. Surface roughness of flowable resin composites eroded by acidic and alcoholic drinks. J Conserv Dent 2012; 15: 137-40
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 18 Tuncer D, Karaman E, Firat E. Does the temperature of beverages affect the surface roughness, hardness, and color stability of a composite resin?. Eur J Dent 2013; 7: 165-71
    Thieme ConnectPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 19 Salerno M, Giacomelli L, Derchi G, Patra N, Diaspro A. Atomic force microscopy in vitro study of surface roughness and fractal character of a dental restoration composite after air-polishing. Biomed Eng Online 2010; 9: 59
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 20 Talu S, Stach S, Alb SF, Salerno M. Multifractal characterization of a dental restorative composite after air-polishing. Chaos Solitons Fractals 2015; 71: 7-13
    CrossrefSearch in Google Scholar
  • 21 Salerno M, Derchi G, Thorat S, Ceseracciu L, Ruffilli R, Barone AC. et al. Surface morphology and mechanical properties of new-generation flowable resin composites for dental restoration. Dent Mater 2011; 27: 1221-8
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 22 Fúcio SB, Carvalho FG, Sobrinho LC, Sinhoreti MA, Puppin-Rontani RM. The influence of 30-day-old Streptococcus mutans biofilm on the surface of esthetic restorative materials – An in vitro study. J Dent 2008; 36: 833-9
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 23 Mitra SB, Lee CY, Bui HT, Tantbirojn D, Rusin RP. Long-term adhesion and mechanism of bonding of a paste-liquid resin-modified glass-ionomer. Dent Mater 2009; 25: 459-66
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 24 Ikeda M, Matin K, Nikaido T, Foxton RM, Tagami J. Effect of surface characteristics on adherence of Smutans biofilms to indirect resin composites. Dent Mater J 2007; 26: 915-23
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 25 Alam F, Balani K. Adhesion force of Staphylococcus aureus on various biomaterial surfaces. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater 2017; 65: 872-80
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 26 Yuan C, Wang X, Gao X, Chen F, Liang X, Li D. et al. Effects of surface properties of polymer-based restorative materials on early adhesion of Streptococcus mutans in vitro. J Dent 2016; 54: 33-40
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 27 Ceci M, Rattalino D, Viola M, Beltrami R, Chiesa M, Colombo M. et al. Resin infiltrant for non-cavitated caries lesions: Evaluation of color stability. J Clin Exp Dent 2017; 9: e231-e237
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 28 Poggio C, Gulino C, Mirando M, Colombo M, Pietrocola G. Preventive effects of different protective agents on dentin erosion: An in vitro investigation. J Clin Exp Dent 2017; 9: e7-e12
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 29 Poggio C, Beltrami R, Colombo M, Ceci M, Dagna A, Chiesa M. et al. In vitro antibacterial activity of different pulp capping materials. J Clin Exp Dent 2015; 7: e584-8
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 30 Scavone M, Armentano I, Fortunati E, Cristofaro F, Mattioli S, Torre L. et al. Antimicrobial properties and cytocompatibility of PLGA/Ag nanocomposites. Materials (Basel) 2016; 9: ii-E37
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 31 Rolland SL, McCabe JF, Robinson C, Walls AW. In vitro biofilm formation on the surface of resin-based dentine adhesives. Eur J Oral Sci 2006; 114: 243-9
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 32 Quirynen M. The clinical meaning of the surface roughness and the surface free energy of intra-oral hard substrata on the microbiology of the supra- and subgingival plaque: Results of in vitro and in vivo experiments. J Dent 1994; 22 (Suppl. 01) S13-6
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 33 Montanaro L, Campoccia D, Rizzi S, Donati ME, Breschi L, Prati C. et al. Evaluation of bacterial adhesion of Streptococcus mutans on dental restorative materials. Biomaterials 2004; 25: 4457-63
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 34 Eick S, Glockmann E, Brandl B, Pfister W. Adherence of Streptococcus mutans to various restorative materials in a continuous flow system. J Oral Rehabil 2004; 31: 278-85
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 35 Carvalho FG, Sampaio CS, Fucio SB, Carlo HL, Correr-Sobrinho L, Puppin-Rontani RM. et al. Effect of chemical and mechanical degradation on surface roughness of three glass ionomers and a nanofilled resin composite. Oper Dent 2012; 37: 509-17
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar