Extract of Propolis on Resin-Modified Glass Ionomer Cement: Effect on Mechanical and Antimicrobial Properties and Dentin Bonding Strength.

Narges Panahandeh,Fatemeh Adinehlou,Seyedeh Mahsa Sheikh-Al-Eslamian,Hassan Torabzadeh,Yingchao Su

doi:10.1155/2021/5597837

Narges Panahandeh, Fatemeh Adinehlou + Show 3 more

Open Access

https://doi.org/10.1155/2021/5597837

Copy DOI

Abstract

This study assessed the effect of addition of aqueous extract of propolis in different concentrations on the mechanical and antimicrobial properties of resin-modified glass ionomer cement (RMGIC). In this in vitro study, powder of Fuji II LC RMGIC was mixed with 25% and 50% aqueous extracts of propolis. Samples (n = 15 for shear bond strength, n = 5 for flexural strength, and n = 20 for the antibacterial activity test) were fabricated using this mixture. The buccal and lingual surfaces of 23 premolars were ground to expose dentin. Tygon tubes were filled with cement, bonded to dentin, and subjected to bond or the flexural strength test in a universal testing machine. Antibacterial activity was assessed using the disc diffusion and well-plate techniques against S. mutans. Data were analyzed using one-way ANOVA and Tukey's test. The three groups showed significant differences (p < 0.001). The 50% propolis group had the lowest flexural and shear bond strength. The control group had the highest flexural and shear bond strength. No growth inhibition zone was noted around any of the discs. It can be concluded that addition of propolis to RMGIC did not confer any antibacterial activity against S. mutans and decreased the flexural and shear bond strength of RMGIC.

Highlights

Secondary caries refers to development of caries around or beneath the existing restorations over time [1] and is the most important and most common cause of restoration replacement [1,2,3]
Evidence shows that the type of restorative material significantly affects plaque accumulation and development of secondary caries [4], accumulation of Streptococcus mutans (S. mutans), and the risk of development of secondary caries is lower around glass ionomer (GI) restorations compared to composite resin [5]
One-way ANOVA showed that the three groups were significantly different (p < 0.001). us, pairwise comparisons were performed using Tukey’s HSD test, which showed that 25% and 50% propolis groups were not significantly different in terms of shear bond strength (p 0.055). e two 25% propolis group and 50% group had significantly lower shear bond strength than the control group (p 0.035 and p 0.001, respectively)

Summary

Introduction

Secondary caries refers to development of caries around or beneath the existing restorations over time [1] and is the most important and most common cause of restoration replacement [1,2,3]. No documented evidence exists regarding the inhibitory effects of GI cements on the occurrence of secondary caries [6]. GI cements have antibacterial effects on a narrow spectrum of microorganisms and have insignificant bactericidal activity [2]. Us, researchers added chlorhexidine, antibiotics, and propolis to GI cements to enhance their antibacterial properties [2, 7,8,9,10,11]. Chemical bonding to enamel and dentin, fluoride release potential, optimal biocompatibility, coefficient of thermal expansion similar to that of tooth structure, and absence of polymerization shrinkage are among the advantages of GI cements [13, 14]

Objectives

Methods

Results

Conclusion