Abstract

Background. This study evaluated the incorporation of casein phosphopeptide-amorphous calcium phosphate (CPP-ACP), calcium sodium phosphosilicate bioactive glass (BAG), chitosan (CH), and methacryloyloxydodecylpyridinium bromide (MDPB) on the compressive and flexural strength, fluoride (F‒ ) release, and bacterial adhesion of conventional glass-ionomer cement (C-GIC). Methods. Modifications were implemented by adding CPP-ACP, BAG, and CH to the glass powder, while MDPB-GIC was prepared by incorporating MDPB to the liquid of C-GIC. Custom-made molds were used for specimen preparation. Compressive and flexural strengths were evaluated using a universal testing machine. F‒ release was calculated with Erichrome cyanide reagent, using UV-spectrophotometry, at two time intervals of 24 hours and seven days. For bacterial adhesion, the test specimens were exposed to the bacterial suspension of Streptococcus mutans and Lactobacillus acidophilus for 4 hours, and the adherent bacteria were quantified using colorimetry as the optical density (OD). Results. The incorporation of MDPB increased the flexural strength of C-GIC, with no effect on its compressive strength. CH significantly improved the compressive and flexural strength; modifications with CPP-ACP, BAG, and MDPB significantly improved the flexural strength of C-GIC. While MDPB-GIC released significantly higher F‒ at 24 hours, CPP-ACP- and BAG-modified GICs were comparable to C-GIC on day 7. C-GIC exhibited the highest bacterial adhesion, and MDPB-GIC showed the least. The data were analyzed with one-way (ANOVA), and pairwise comparisons were made with Tukey HSD tests. Conclusion. Hence, it can be concluded that the incorporation of CPP-ACP, BAG, and CH improved the mechanical properties of C-GIC, whereas MDPB improved the resistance of C-GIC to bacterial adhesion.

Highlights

  • Recurrent caries has been the most frequent cause of failure of dental restorations

  • glass-ionomer cement (GIC), and CH-GIC were significantly higher than conventional glass-ionomer cement (C-GIC) and methacryloyloxydodecylpyridinium bromide (MDPB)-GIC (P < 0.05)

  • No significant difference was observed between the mean compressive strength values of C-GIC and MDPB-GIC (P > 0.05) (Figure 2)

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Recurrent caries has been the most frequent cause of failure of dental restorations. Fluoride-releasing restorative materials were introduced to overcome this disadvantage. The fluoride release of these newer materials is still less than GIC.[1] Certain inherent properties of GIC, such as anticariogenicity, biocompatibility, adhesion to enamel, dentin, and composite, and its low coefficient of thermal expansion, which is similar to that of tooth structure, make it suitable for a wide variety of clinical applications. Despite these advantages, GIC has certain drawbacks, such as brittleness and porosity, which result in poor mechanical properties, such as low wear resistance and fracture toughness.[2]. It can be concluded that the incorporation of CPP-ACP, BAG, and CH improved the mechanical properties of C-GIC, whereas MDPB improved the resistance of C-GIC to bacterial adhesion

Methods
Results
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call