Bacterial Adhesion and Surface Roughness for Different Clinical Techniques for Acrylic Polymethyl Methacrylate

Lucas Costa De Medeiros Dantas,Lucas Zago Naves,Talita Souza Dantas,Flávio Domingues Das Neves,Adérito Soares Da Mota,João Paulo Da Silva-Neto

doi:10.1155/2016/8685796

Abstract

This study sought to assess the effect of different surface finishing and polishing protocols on the surface roughness and bacterial adhesion (S. sanguinis) to polymethyl methacrylates (PMMA). Fifty specimens were divided into 5 groups (n = 10) according to their fabrication method and surface finishing protocol: LP (3 : 1 ratio and laboratory polishing), NF (Nealon technique and finishing), NP (Nealon technique and manual polishing), MF (3 : 1 ratio and manual finishing), and MP (3 : 1 ratio and manual polishing). For each group, five specimens were submitted to bacterial adhesion tests and analyzed by scanning electron microscopy (SEM). Two additional specimens were subjected to surface topography analysis by SEM and the remaining three specimens were subjected to surface roughness measurements. Data were compared by one-way ANOVA. The mean bacterial counts were as follows: NF, 19.6 ± 3.05; MP, 5.36 ± 2.08; NP, 4.96 ± 1.93; MF, 7.36 ± 2.45; and LP, 1.56 ± 0.62 (CFU). The mean surface roughness values were as follows: NF, 3.23 ± 0.15; MP, 0.52 ± 0.05; NP, 0.60 ± 0.08; MF, 2.69 ± 0.12; and LP, 0.07 ± 0.02 (μm). A reduction in the surface roughness was observed to be directly related to a decrease in bacterial adhesion. It was verified that the laboratory processing of PMMA might decrease the surface roughness and consequently the adhesion of S. sanguinis to this material.

Highlights

Acrylic polymethyl methacrylates (PMMA) were one of the first materials used for dental provisional restorations
The results of the present study showed that different manufacturing techniques resulted in significant differences for surface roughness and bacterial adhesion
Studies comparing different materials according to their surface roughness and bacterial adhesion reported results that are in accordance with our findings [1, 2, 5, 10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20,21,22]

Summary

Introduction

Acrylic polymethyl methacrylates (PMMA) were one of the first materials used for dental provisional restorations. PMMA provisional materials are more susceptible to bacterial retention and colonization than the materials used for final restorations due to the increased surface roughness and, generally, inferior fitting interfaces provided by the former [1, 2]. This is especially true when the restorations are worn for long periods. The relationship between bacterial adhesion and the surface roughness of dental materials has previously been demonstrated [1,2,3,4]. The number of bacteria adherent to a Groups L (control) MP MF NP NF

Methods

Discussion

Conclusion