In-vitro evaluation of the microhardness and fluoride releasing properties of chlorhexidine+benzalkonium chloride mixtures incorporated into conventional glass ionomer cement
Abstract
Objectives: In atraumatic restorative dentistry, the usage of antibacterial materials with glass ionomer cements (GICs) are considered as beneficial for eliminating the residual caries under the restoration. However, adding such antibacterials to the GIC could lead harmful effects on the pyhsical and chemical properties of the cement nature. Thus, it was aimed to analyze the microhardness and fluoride releasing alterations of chlorhexidine (CHX)+benzalkonium chloride (BC) antibacterial (AB) mixtures which were added to the powder of conventional glass ionomer cement (CGIC).
Materials and Method: The powders of AB (1% CHX+1% BC) were added to the powders of CGIC and selected as experimental group (EXP). Antibacterial free CGIC was assigned as control (CNT). Vickers micro hardness measurements (VHN; n=10, for each group) and fluoride releasing (FR; n=10; for each group) amounts were calculated at days 1 and 7. Mann Whitney U and Wilcoxon tests were used for statistical analysis at a significance value of p<0.05.
Results: Significantly higher VHN values were obtained in CNT compared to the EXP group at days 1 (p<0.001) and 7 (p<0.001). Significantly increased VHN values observed at day 7 compared to the day 1 in CNT (p<0.01) and EXP (p<0.05) groups. The FRA revealed no significant differences between CNT and EXP at days 1 (p>0.05) and 7 (p>0.05). Significantly higher FR values were shown at day 7 compared to the day 1 in CNT (p<0.01) and EXP (p<0.01).
Conclusions: It can be concluded that, even the usage of 1% CHX + 1% BC mixtures with the CGIC may be more problematic for microhardness values but acceptable for fluoride releasing properties compared to the CNT group, reasonable time dependent alterations observed in VHN and FR results should not be overlooked for future studies.
Keywords
References
- 1.Frencken JE, Makoni F, Sithole WD. ART restorations and glass ionomer sealants in Zimbabwe: survival after 3 years. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol 1998; 26: 372–381.
- 2.Massara ML, Alves JB, Brandao PR. Atraumatic restorative treatment: clinical, ultrastructural and chemical analysis. Caries Res 2002; 36: 430–436.
- 3. Ferreira Fde M, do Vale MP, Jansen WC, Paiva SM, Pordeus IA. Performance of Brazilian and imported glass ionomer cements used in Atraumatic Restorative Treatment (ART) regarding microleakage in primary molars. J Appl Oral Sci 2006;14:312-318.
- 4. Van Amerongen WE. Dental caries under glass ionomer restorations. J Public Health Dent 1996;56:150–154.
- 5. Weerheijm KL, Groen HJ. The residual caries dilemma. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol 1999;27:436–441.
- 6. Weerheijm KL, Kreulen CM, de Soet JJ, et al. Bacterial counts in carious dentine under restorations: 2-year in vivo effects. Caries Res 1999;33:130–134.
- 7.Jedrychowski JR, Caputo AA, Kerpes S. Antibacterial and mechanical properties of restorative materials combined with chlorhexidine. J Oral Rehabil 1983;10: 373–381.
- 8.Tüzüner T, Ulusu T. Effect of antibacterial agents on the surface hardness of a conventional glass-ionomer cement. Journal of Applied Oral Science 2012;20:45-9.
Details
Primary Language
English
Subjects
Health Care Administration
Journal Section
Research Article
Authors
Tamer Tüzüner
*
Türkiye
Publication Date
July 29, 2018
Submission Date
March 18, 2018
Acceptance Date
April 5, 2018
Published in Issue
Year 2018 Volume: 21 Number: 2