Degradation of Resin Restorative Materials by Streptococcus Mutans: A Pilot Study

Gautam, Ankit; Thakur, Ruchi; Shashikiran, N D; Singla, Sham; Agarwal, Nikita; Tiwari, Shilpi

doi:10.17796/1053-4628-41.3.225

Cited by 4 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 12 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…It has been reported that S. mutans contains esterases that can potentially degrade resin-based restorative materials [32]. Gautam et al [33] revealed by in vitro test that degradation by S. mutans was reduced for resin composites containing S-PRG filler (Beautifil II) compared with other commercial resin composites. On the other hand, Yoshihara et al [34] reported production of many holes on the surface of S-PRG filler-containing resin composites after immersion in lactic acid at pH 4.0 for 3 days, while no change in surface An investigation of demineralization in the tooth structure surrounding filling materials revealed that S-PRG filler-containing resin composites inhibited the demineralization of wall and outer lesions in enamel and dentin and increased the surrounding tooth hardness [30].…”

Section: Restorative Treatmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Multiple-Ion Releasing Bioactive Surface Pre-Reacted Glass-Ionomer (S-PRG) Filler: Innovative Technology for Dental Treatment and Care

Imazato

Nakatsuka

Kitagawa

et al. 2023

JFB

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Surface Pre-Reacted Glass-ionomer (S-PRG) filler, which releases strontium (Sr2+), borate (BO33−), fluoride (F−), sodium (Na+), silicate (SiO32−), and aluminum (Al3+) ions at high concentrations, is a unique glass filler that are utilized in dentistry. Because of its multiple-ion releasing characteristics, S-PRG filler exhibits several bioactivities such as tooth strengthening, acid neutralization, promotion of mineralization, inhibition of bacteria and fungi, inhibition of matrix metalloproteinases, and enhancement of cell activity. Therefore, S-PRG filler per se and S-PRG filler-containing materials have the potential to be beneficial for various dental treatments and care. Those include restorative treatment, caries prevention/management, vital pulp therapy, endodontic treatment, prevention/treatment of periodontal disease, prevention of denture stomatitis, and perforation repair/root end filling. This review summarizes bioactive functions exhibited by S-PRG filler and its possible contribution to oral health.

show abstract

Section: Restorative Treatmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Multiple-Ion Releasing Bioactive Surface Pre-Reacted Glass-Ionomer (S-PRG) Filler: Innovative Technology for Dental Treatment and Care

Imazato

Nakatsuka

Kitagawa

et al. 2023

JFB

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Higher biofilm growth indirectly increases the effectiveness of acid demineralization by both increasing acidity and reducing the diffusion of salivary buffering at the tooth interface 15 . Current evidence suggests that S. mutans has a multi‐factorial role in the destruction of the tooth‐resin composite interface since ester bond degradation can be pronounced during periods of higher pH (before and during early sucrose exposure) and tooth interfacial demineralization occurs during low pH, where bacterial esterases are less active 8,16 . A cycle of ester bond hydrolysis within the polymer and tooth demineralization may affect the mechanical integrity of both the tooth and resin polymers, thus affecting the overall interfacial adhesive properties 7 .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…15 Current evidence suggests that S. mutans has a multi-factorial role in the destruction of the tooth-resin composite interface since ester bond degradation can be pronounced during periods of higher pH (before and during early sucrose exposure) and tooth interfacial demineralization occurs during low pH, where bacterial esterases are less active. 8,16 A cycle of ester bond hydrolysis within the polymer and tooth demineralization may affect the mechanical integrity of both the tooth and resin polymers, thus affecting the overall interfacial adhesive properties. 7 Bacterial degradation may contribute to the low (~65%)-clinical success rate of resin composites after 10 years in high caries risk patients.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

A novel methacrylate derivative polymer that resists bacterial cell‐mediated biodegradation

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study tests biodegradation resistance of a custom synthesized novel ethylene glycol ethyl methacrylate (EGEMA) with ester bond linkages that are external to the central polymer backbone when polymerized. Ethylene glycol dimethacrylate (EGDMA) with internal ester bond linkages and EGEMA discs were prepared in a polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) mold using 40 μl macromer and photo/co‐initiator mixture cured for 40 s at 1000 mW/cm2. The discs were stored in the constant presence of Streptococcus mutans (S. mutans) in Todd Hewitt Yeast + Glucose (THYE+G) media up to 9 weeks (n = 8 for each macromer type) and physical/mechanical properties were assessed. Initial measurements EGEMA versus EGDMA polymer discs showed equivalent degree of conversion (45.69% ± 2.38 vs. 46.79% ± 4.64), diametral tensile stress (DTS; 8.12± 2.92 MPa vs. 6.02 ± 1.48 MPa), and low subsurface optical defects (0.41% ± 0.254% vs. 0.11% ± 0.074%). The initial surface wettability (contact angle) was slightly higher (p ≤ .012) for EGEMA (62.02° ± 3.56) than EGDMA (53.86° ± 5.61°). EGDMA showed higher initial Vicker's hardness than EGEMA (8.03 ± 0.88 HV vs. 5.93 ± 0.69 HV; p ≤ .001). After 9 weeks of S. mutans exposure, EGEMA (ΔDTS—1.30 MPa) showed higher resistance to biodegradation effects with a superior DTS than EGDMA (ΔDTS—6.39 MPa) (p = .0039). Visible and scanning electron microscopy images of EGEMA show less surface cracking and defects than EGDMA. EGDMA had higher loss of material (18.9% vs. 8.5%, p = .0009), relative changes to fracture toughness (92.5% vs. 49.2%, p = .0022) and increased water sorption (6.1% vs. 1.9%, p = .0022) compared to EGEMA discs. The flipped external ester group linkage design is attributed to EGEMA showing higher resistance to bacterial degradation effects than an internal ester group linkage design methacrylate.

show abstract

“…The surface of resin-based restorative materials can be negatively affected by bacterial biodegradation or by salivary enzymes, 1,2,3 and occlusal and toothbrushing induced wear. 4,5 Previous studies have shown that toothbrushing can increase the surface roughness and alter the surface topography of resin composites, 6,7 which can increase the formation of biofilm on the tooth.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Multiple-peak and single-peak dental curing lights comparison on the wear resistance of bulk-fill composites

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The effects of tooth brushing could affect the long-term esthetic outcome of composite restorations. This study evaluated the effect of two different emission spectrum light-curing units on the surface roughness, roughness profile, topography and microhardness of bulk-fill composites after in vitro toothbrushing. Valo (multiple-peak) and Demi Ultra (single-peak) curing lights were each used for 10s to polymerize three bulk-fill resin composites: Filtek Bulk Fill Posterior Restorative (FBF), Tetric EvoCeram Bulk Fill (TET) and Surefil SDR Flow (SDR). After 30,000 reciprocal strokes in a toothbrushing machine, the roughness profile, surface roughness, surface morphology, and microhardness were examined. Representative SEM images were also obtained. When light-cured with the Demi Ultra, SDR showed the most loss in volume compared to the other composites and higher volume loss compared to when was light-cured with Valo. The highest surface roughness and roughness profile values were found in SDR after toothbrushing, for both light-curing units tested. FBF always had the greatest microhardness values. Light-curing TET with Valo resulted in higher microhardness compared to when using the Demi Ultra. Confocal and SEM images show that toothbrushing resulted in smoother surfaces for FBF and TET. All composites exhibited surface volume loss after toothbrushing. The loss in volume of SDR depended on the light-curing unit used. Toothbrushing can alter the surface roughness and superficial aspect of some bulk-fill composites. The choice of light-curing unit did not affect the roughness profile, but, depending on the composite, it affected the microhardness.

show abstract

Degradation of Resin Restorative Materials by Streptococcus Mutans: A Pilot Study

Abstract: SM degrades the resin based restorative materials & among the tested materials Resin Modified GIC appears to be most Biostable.

Cited by 4 publications

References 12 publications

Multiple-Ion Releasing Bioactive Surface Pre-Reacted Glass-Ionomer (S-PRG) Filler: Innovative Technology for Dental Treatment and Care

Multiple-Ion Releasing Bioactive Surface Pre-Reacted Glass-Ionomer (S-PRG) Filler: Innovative Technology for Dental Treatment and Care

A novel methacrylate derivative polymer that resists bacterial cell‐mediated biodegradation

Multiple-peak and single-peak dental curing lights comparison on the wear resistance of bulk-fill composites

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About