An evaluation of the effect on streptococcus mutans adhesion of surface roughness in different aesthetic restorative materials

Mustafa Orkun Ertuğrul; Şeyhmus Bakır; Elif Pınar Bakir; Nida Özcan

TR EN

Farklı estetik restoratif materyallerde yüzey pürüzlülüğünün streptokok mutans adezyonuna etkisinin değerlendirilmesi

Öz

Amaç: Bu çalışmanın amacı, diş rengindeki restoratif materyallere farklı bitirme ve polisaj disk sistemlerinin uygulanmasından sonra, farklı estetik restoratif materyallerdeki yüzey pürüzlülüğünün Streptokok mutans (S. mutans) adezyonuna etkisini değerlendirmektir. Gereç-Yöntem: Çalışmada kullanılan restoratif test materyallerinin her biri için 21 adet olmak üzere toplam 126 adet disk şeklinde örnek hazırlandı. Her gruba farklı bitirme ve polisaj diski seti uygulanması için numuneler 7'şerli 3 gruba ayrıldı. Örnekler müsin içeren yapay tükürük içerisinde bir saat bekletilerek malzemelerin yüzeyinde pelikıl oluşumu sağlandı. Örnekler solüsyonlarda inkübe edildi ve 24 saat sonunda adezyon gösteren S. mutans sayısı belirlendi. Bulgular: Malzemeler arasında yüzey pürüzlülük değerleri ve bakteri adezyonu açısından istatistiksel olarak anlamlı farklılık tespit edilirken (p<0,05), bitirme ve cilalama disk setleri arasında ise anlamlı bir fark bulunamadı (p>0,05). Malzemelerin yüzey pürüzlülüğü ile S. mutans adezyonu arasında %26,2 oranında pozitif korelasyon belirlendi (p<0,05). Sonuç: Materyallerin farklı pürüzlülük ve adezyon değerleri göstermesinde; materyallerin kimyasal içerik ve fiziksel özelliklerinin etkili olduğu; materyal yüzeyine gerçekleşen bakteri tutulumunun nedenlerinin in-vitro ve in-vivo araştırmalarla aydınlatılabileceği düşünülmektedir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

An evaluation of the effect on streptococcus mutans adhesion of surface roughness in different aesthetic restorative materials

Abstract

Aim: The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect on Streptococcus mutans (S. mutans) adhesion of the surface roughness in different aesthetic restorative materials after the application of different finishing and polishing disc systems to tooth-coloured restorative materials. Material-Method: A total of 126 disc-shaped samples were prepared as 21 for each of the restorative test materials used in the study. The samples were separated into 3 groups of 7 for the application of a different finishing and polishing disc set to each group. Pellicle formation on the surface of the materials was obtained by leaving the samples for one hour in artificial saliva containing mucin. The samples were then incubated in solutions containing S. mutans, and after 24 hours, the number of S. mutans showing adhesion were counted. Results: A statistically significant difference was determined between the materials in respect of surface roughness values and bacteria adhesion (p<0.05), and no significant difference was found between the finishing and polishing disc sets (p>0.05). A positive correlation was determined at the rate of 26.2% between the surface roughness of the materials and S. mutans adhesion (p<0.05). Conclusion: Materials show different surface roughness and adhesion values and the chemical content and physical properties of the material have an impact on this. The reasons of bacteria adhesion on material surface is clarified with in-vitro and in-vivo studies.

Keywords

Supporting Institution

The Scientific Research Projects Commission Directorate of Dicle University

Project Number

DİŞ 20.001

Ethical Statement

We realized our study on dental materials in vitro under laboratory conditions. For this reason, we did not receive ethics committee approval.

References

1. Florea RM, Carcea L. Polymer matrix composites–routes and properties. Int J of Mod Man. 2012;4:59-64.
2. Hosoya Y, et al. Effects of polishing on surface roughness, gloss and color of resin composites. J Oral Sci. 2011;53:283-291.
3. Ono M, et al. Surface properties of resin composite materials relative to biofilm formation. Dental Material Journal. 2007;26:613-622.
4. Konishi N, Torii Y, Kurosaki A, et al. Confocal laser scanning microscopic analysis of early plaque formed on resin composite and human enamel. Journal of Oral Rehabilitation. 2003;30(8):790-795.
5. Davidson CL. Advances in glass-ionomer cements. J Appl Oral Sci. 2006;14:3-9.
6. Çakır FY, Gürgan S, Attar N. Microbiology of dentalcaries. Hacettepe Diş Hek Fak Derg. 2010;34(3-4):78-91.
7. Türkmen B, Ayhan K, Güneş Altıntaş E. Dental plak oluşumundan sorumlu mikroorganizmalar ve bunların tüketilen gıdalarla ilişkisi. Nevşehir Bilim ve Teknoloji Der TARGİD. 2016. p. 51-61.
8. Atabek D, Ekçi ES, Bani M, et al. The effect of various polishing systems on the surface roughness of composite resins. Acta Odontol Turc. 2016;33(2):69-74.

9. İlday N, Bayındır YZ, Erdem V. Effect of three different acidic beverages on surface characteristics of composite resin restorative materials. Materials Research Innovations. 2010;14:385-391.
10. Özcan S, Ünsal ŞF, Uzun Ö, et al. Bitirme ve parlatma işlemlerinin farklı kompozit rezinlerin yüzey özellikleri üzerine etkileri. GÜ Diş Hek Fak Der. 2012;29(3):173-177.
11. Sahbaz C, Bahsi E, İnce B, et al. Effect of the different finishing and polishing procedures on the surface roughness of three different posterior composite resins. Scanning. 2016;38(5):448-454.
12. Yıldırım M, Patır A, Seymen F, et al. Estetik restoratif materyallerin cila işlemlerinden sonra yüzey yapısının SEM ile incelenmesi. Atatürk Üniv Diş Hek Fak Derg. 2012;22(3):277-286.
13. Özgünaltay G, Yazıcı AR, Görücü J. Effect of finishing and polishing procedures on the surface roughness of new tooth-coloured restoratives. Journal of Oral Rehabilitation. 2003;30(2):218-224.
14. Gedik R, Hürmüzlü F, Coşkun A, et al. Surface roughness of new microhybrid resin-based composites. The Journal of the American Dental Association. 2005;136(8):1106-1112.
15. Yıldız E, Karaarslan ES, Şimşek M, et al. Color stability and surface roughness of polished anterior restorative materials. Dental Materials Journal. 2015;34(5):629–639.
16. Gauthier MA, Stangel I, Ellis TH, et al. Oxygen inhibition in dental resins. J DentRes. 2005;84;725-729.
17. Mallya PL, Acharya S, Ballal V, et al. Profilometric study to compare the effectiveness of various finishing and polishing techniques on different restorative glass ionomer cements. Journal of Interdisciplinary Dentistry. 2013;3(2):86-90.
18. Bayrak GD, Sandalli N, Selvi-Kuvvetli S, et al. Effect of two different polishing systems on fluoride release, surface roughness and bacterial adhesion of newly developed restorative materials. J Esthet Restor Dent. 2017;29(6):424-434.
19. Koh R, Neiva G, Dennison J, et al. Finishing systems on the final surface roughness of composites. J Contemp Dent Pract. 2008;1(9):138-145.
20. Prabhakar AR, Mahantesh T, Vishwas TD, et al. Effect of surface treatment with remineralizing on the color stability and roughness of esthetic restorative materials. J. Dent Clin Res. 2009;5:19-27.
21. Lassila LVJ, Garoushi S, Soderling E. Adherence of streptococcus mutans to fiber-reinforced filling composite and conventional restorative materials. Open Dent J. 2009;3:227-232.
22. Eick S, Glockmann E, Brandl B, et al. Adherence of streptococcus mutans to various restorative materials in a continuous flow system. J. Oral Rehabil. 2004;31:278-285.
23. Kawai K, Tsuchitani Y. Effects of resin composite components on glucosyl transferase of cariogenic bacterium. Journal of Biomedical Materials Research. 2000;51(1):123-127.
24. Tanner J, Carlén A, Söderling E, et al. Adsorption of parotid saliva proteins and adhesion of streptococcus mutans ATCC 21752 todental fiber reinforced composites. Journal of Biomedical Materials Research Part B. 2003;66(1):391-398.
25. Brambilla E, Cagetti MG, Gagliani M, et al. Influence of different adhesive restorative materials on mutans streptococcus colonization. Am J Dent. 2005;18:173-176.
26. Carlen A, Nikdel K, Wennerberg A, et al. Surface characteristics and in vitro biofilm formation on glass ionomer and composite resin. Biomaterials. 2001;22(5):481-487.
27. Montanaro L, et al. Evaluation of bacterial adhesion of Streptococcus mutans on dental restorative materials. Biomaterials. 2004;25:4457-4463.
28. Poggio C, Arciola CR, Rosti F, et al. Adhesion of streptococcus mutans to different restorative materials. Int J Artif Organs. 2009;32(9):671-677.
29. Shu M, Wonga L, Millerb JH, et al. Development of multi-species consortia biofilms of oral bacteria as an enamel and root caries model system. Archives of Oral Biology. 2000;45:27–40.
30. Seminario A, Broukal Z, Ivancakova R. Mutans streptococcus and the development of dental plaque. Praque Med Rep. 2005;106:349-358.
31. Al-Naimi OT, Itota T, Hobson RS, et al. Fluoride release for restorative materials and its effect on biofilm formation in natural saliva. J Mater Sci Mater Med. 2008;19(3):1243-1248.

Details

Primary Language

English

Subjects

Restorative Dentistry , Dental Materials

Journal Section

Research Article

Authors

Mustafa Orkun Ertuğrul ^*
0000-0001-5138-900X
Türkiye

Şeyhmus Bakır
0000-0003-2048-3065
Türkiye

Elif Pınar Bakir
0000-0003-4011-5091
Türkiye

Nida Özcan
0000-0001-6898-7516
Türkiye

Publication Date

December 30, 2024

Submission Date

April 8, 2024

Acceptance Date

December 9, 2024

Published in Issue

Year 2024 Volume: 27 Number: 4

IZ

https://izlik.org/JA63KW64RU

Cite

RIS / Bibtex

EndNote

Ertuğrul MO, Bakır Ş, Bakir EP, Özcan N (December 1, 2024) An evaluation of the effect on streptococcus mutans adhesion of surface roughness in different aesthetic restorative materials. Cumhuriyet Dental Journal 27 4 214–221.