Comparative evaluation of surface roughness and bacterial adhesion on two bioactive cements: an in-vitro study

被引:0
|
作者
Dey, Pallabi [1 ]
Suprabha, Baranya Shrikrishna [1 ]
Suman, Ethel [2 ]
Natarajan, Srikant [3 ]
Shenoy, Ramya [4 ]
Rao, Arathi [1 ]
机构
[1] Manipal Acad Higher Educ, Manipal Coll Dent Sci Mangalore, Dept Pediat & Prevent Dent, Manipal 576104, Karnataka, India
[2] Manipal Acad Higher Educ, Kasturba Med Coll Mangalore, Dept Microbiol, Manipal 576104, Karnataka, India
[3] Manipal Acad Higher Educ, Manipal Coll Dent Sci Mangalore, Dept Oral Pathol & Microbiol, Manipal 576104, Karnataka, India
[4] Manipal Acad Higher Educ, Manipal Coll Dent Sci Mangalore, Dept Publ Hlth Dent, Manipal 576104, Karnataka, India
来源
BMC ORAL HEALTH | 2024年 / 24卷 / 01期
关键词
Biofilm; Bacterial adhesion; Streptococcus mutans; Composite resins; Glass Ionomer cement; RESTORATIVE MATERIALS; GLASS-IONOMER; STREPTOCOCCUS-MUTANS; BIOFILM FORMATION; FLUORIDE RELEASE;
D O I
10.1186/s12903-024-05083-y
中图分类号
R78 [口腔科学];
学科分类号
1003 ;
摘要
Background Dental restorative materials are recognized as artificial niches that facilitate the adherence and accumulation of oral microorganisms. To mitigate oral diseases and extend the lifespan of restorations, it is advantageous to use dental materials that exhibit low susceptibility to bacterial adhesion. Objective To evaluate and compare bacterial adhesion on two bioactive restorative materials, a glass hybrid restorative, and an alkasite with a nanohybrid resin composite as a positive control. The secondary objectives were to compare the surface roughness (SR) of the materials and determine the correlation between the bacterial adhesion and the SR. Materials and methods The samples consisted of 33 polished discs of each material: Group A: Tetric (R) N-Ceram (nanohybrid resin composite), Group B: Equia ForteT HT Fil (glass hybrid restorative) and Group C: Cention N (R) (alkasite). Streptococcus mutans cultures were inoculated and after 24-hours of incubation, bacterial adhesion was measured by measuring optical density (OD) and number of colony forming units (CFUs). After 96-hours incubation, the bacterial cell count was determined using scanning electron microscopy (SEM). SR was assessed using surface profilometer. Results Alkasite had significantly lower OD and CFUs (p < 0.001 and p = 0.015 respectively). According to the SEM analysis, the glass hybrid restorative had lower mean bacterial cell count with no significant difference between the groups. The nanohybrid composite had the smoothest surface that was significantly lower than the alkasite and glass hybrid restorative (p = 0.002). None of the groups demonstrated a correlation between bacterial adhesion and SR. Conclusion Alkasite impedes bacterial adhesion better than the glass hybrid restorative and nanohybrid composite, while smoother surfaces are achieved with the nanohybrid composite.
引用
收藏
页数:11
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [11] Evaluation of Surface Roughness in Clear Silicon Fabricated Using Three Different Techniques: An In-vitro Study
    Ramanuj, Vrushti bharat
    Arora, Ankit ved
    Kapoor, Sonali vinod
    Chawda, Neha sudhakar
    Sheth, Maulee dharmesh
    Desai, Kavina satish
    JOURNAL OF CLINICAL AND DIAGNOSTIC RESEARCH, 2024, 18 (03) : ZC12 - ZC15
  • [12] Evaluation of the Colour Stability and Surface Roughness of Polymethylmethacrylate and Indirect Composites With and Without Ageing: An In-Vitro Study
    Narde, Joshua
    Ahmed, Nabeel
    Keskar, Study Varun
    Pandurangan, Kiran Kumar
    CUREUS JOURNAL OF MEDICAL SCIENCE, 2024, 16 (08)
  • [13] BACTERIAL ADHESION TO AND PENETRATION OF INTESTINAL MUCUS IN-VITRO
    COHEN, PS
    LAUX, DC
    ADHESION OF MICROBIAL PATHOGENS, 1995, 253 : 309 - 314
  • [14] The effect of surface roughness on fibroblast adhesion in vitro
    Richards, RG
    INJURY-INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF THE CARE OF THE INJURED, 1996, 27 : 38 - 43
  • [15] Surface roughness in nanoparticle resin composites subjected to two polishing systems: An In vitro comparative study
    Ramirez-Vargas, Giovanna Gisella
    Ladera-Castaneda, Marysela, I
    Lopez-Gurreonero, Carlos
    Cornejo-Pinto, Alberto
    Cachay-Criado, Hernan
    Cervantes-Ganoza, Luis Adolfo
    Cayo-Rojas, Cesar Felix
    JOURNAL OF INTERNATIONAL SOCIETY OF PREVENTIVE AND COMMUNITY DENTISTRY, 2023, 13 (02): : 114 - 123
  • [16] Surface treatment of alloys for resin adhesion. An in-vitro study
    1600, Elsevier Science Ltd, Oxford, Engl (17):
  • [17] Comparative evaluation of the depth of cure and surface roughness of bulk-fill composites: An in vitro study
    Parasher, Anusha
    Ginjupalli, Kishore
    Somayaji, Krishnaraj
    Kabbinale, Pradeep
    DENTAL AND MEDICAL PROBLEMS, 2020, 57 (01) : 39 - 44
  • [18] Comparative evaluation of effect of different polishing systems on surface roughness of composite resin: An in vitro study
    Chour, Rashmi G.
    Moda, Aman
    Arora, Arpana
    Arafath, Muhmmed Y.
    Shetty, Vikram K.
    Rishal, Yousef
    JOURNAL OF INTERNATIONAL SOCIETY OF PREVENTIVE AND COMMUNITY DENTISTRY, 2016, 6 : 166 - 170
  • [19] The effect of standardised implantoplasty protocol on titanium surface roughness: an in-vitro study
    Tawse-Smith, Andrew
    Kota, Akash
    Jayaweera, Yathen
    van Vuuren, Wendy Jansen
    Ma, Sunyoung
    BRAZILIAN ORAL RESEARCH, 2016, 30
  • [20] An In-vitro Evaluation of Grinding and Polishing on Surface Roughness and Flexural Strength of Monolithic Zirconia
    Ranjan, Rishabh
    Mittal, Sanjeev
    Sharma, Prabal
    Sharma, Bhumika
    Singh, Ankita
    Patel, Sneha
    JOURNAL OF CLINICAL AND DIAGNOSTIC RESEARCH, 2024, 18 (10) : ZC105 - ZC110