journal article·2021-02-16Open access

Bacterial Adhesion on Glass–Ionomer Cements and Micro/Nano Hybrid Composite Dental Surfaces

Klemen Bohinc, Erna Tintor, Davor Kovačević, Rajko Vidrih, Anamarija Zore, Anže Abram, Željka Kojić, Marija Obradović, Valentina Veselinović, Olivera Dolić

Coatings· Volume 11· Issue 2

Abstract

Dental restorations need to reproduce the aspect of the natural teeth of the patient, and must be non-toxic, biocompatible, and have good mechanical properties so that they can last for longer. The aim of this study was to determine the extent of bacterial adhesion of Streptococcus mutans on four different dental material surfaces, i.e., two glass–ionomer cements (Fuji conventional and Fuji hybrid) and two ceramic composites (Micro hybrid composite and Nano hybrid composite). To understand the bacterial adhesion on these four different dental materials, various surface properties were measured: roughness, contact angle, CIE color parameters and zeta potential. We found that the greatest adhesion extent was obtained for the Nano hybrid composite surface. The pronounced adhesion is the interplay between the relatively high roughness and hydrophilicity of the Nano hybrid composite surface. Color changes upon immersing ceramic composites in red wine and black tea proved that both beverages adhered to them. Black tea adhered more intensively than wine, and showed a higher inhibitory effect on the growth of Streptococcus mutans and Staphylococcus aureus.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline

Research context

OpenAlex topics: Dental materials and restorations · Dental Research and COVID-19 · Endodontics and Root Canal Treatments

SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.

Affiliations

Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Ljubljana, 1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia

Department of Chemistry, Faculty of Science, University of Zagreb, 10000 Zagreb, Croatia

Biotechnical Faculty, University of Ljubljana, 1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia

Department for Nanostructured Materials, Jožef Stefan Institute, 1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia

Faculty of Medicine, University of Banja Luka, 78000 Banja Luka, Bosnia and Herzegovina

References (48)

Show source-provided references
1. Effects of various chair-side surface treatment methods on dental restorative materials with respect to contact angles and surface roughness10.4012/dmj.2014-098 ↗
2. Adhesion ofStreptococcus mutans to various dental materials in a laminar flow chamber system10.1002/jbm.b.30985 ↗
3. Surface properties and in vitro Streptococcus mutans adhesion to dental resin polymers10.1007/s10856-007-3352-7 ↗
4. The role of surface sealants in the roughness of composites after a simulated toothbrushing test10.1016/j.jdent.2009.08.002 ↗
5. Effect of fluid resins on the surface roughness and topography of resin composite restorations analyzed by atomic force microscope10.1016/j.jmbbm.2010.12.004 ↗
6. Effects of Resin Hydrophilicity on Dentin Bond Strength10.1177/154405910608501108 ↗
7. Surface properties of dental polymers: Measurements of contact angles, roughness and fluoride release10.1590/S1516-14392008000300002 ↗
8. The effect of restorative and prosthetic materials on dental plaque10.1111/j.1600-0757.1995.tb00049.x ↗
9. The Influence of Surface-Free Energy on Supra- and Subgingival Plaque Microbiology. An In Vivo Study on Implants10.1902/jop.1994.65.2.162 ↗
10. Adhesion of eukaryotic cells andStaphylococcus aureus to silicon model surfaces10.1002/jbm.a.31495 ↗
11. Retention of Candida albicans on acrylic resin and silicone of different surface topography10.1016/S0022-3913(97)70148-3 ↗
12. Microbial accumulation and vitality on different restorative materials10.1016/0109-5641(93)90049-V ↗
13. Plaque accumulation on crowns made of various materials
14. Surface characterization of modern resin composites: A multitechnique approach
15. Effect of material characteristics and/or surface topography on biofilm development10.1111/j.1600-0501.2006.01353.x ↗
16. Tooth color and reflectance as related to light scattering and enamel hardness10.1177/00220345950740011401 ↗
17. Investigation of Factors Influencing Stain Formation Utilizing an in Situ Model10.1177/08959374950090041901 ↗
18. Color Difference Thresholds in Dentistry10.1111/jerd.12149 ↗
19. Electrical detection and characterization of bacterial adhesion using electrochemical impedance spectroscopy-based flow chamber10.1016/j.colsurfa.2008.01.005 ↗
20. Influence of temperature on biofilm fo rmation by Listeria monocytogenes on various food-contact surfaces: Relationship with motility and cell surface hydrophobicity10.1111/j.1365-2672.2007.03688.x ↗
21. Forces involved in bacterial adhesion to hydrophilic and hydrophobic surfaces10.1099/mic.0.2008/018622-0 ↗
22. Bacterial adhesion: A physicochemical approach10.1007/BF02025589 ↗
23. Reasons for placement and replacement of restorations in student clinics in Manchester and Athens10.1034/j.1600-0579.2000.040402.x ↗
24. Comparison of surface roughness of oral hard materials to the threshold surface roughness for bacterial plaque retention: A review of the literature10.1016/S0109-5641(97)80038-3 ↗
25. Biofilm Formation on Dental Restorative and Implant Materials10.1177/0022034510368644 ↗
26. A new translucent cement for dentistry. The glass ionomer cement10.1038/sj.bdj.4802810 ↗
27. Glass-ionomer cement restorative materials: A sticky subject?10.1111/j.1834-7819.2010.01293.x ↗
28. Dental Glass Ionomer Cements as Permanent Filling Materials?—Properties, Limitations and Future Trends10.3390/ma3010076 ↗
29. The clinical development of the glass-ionomer cement. II. Some clinical applications10.1111/j.1834-7819.1977.tb04463.x ↗
30. Fracture toughness of dental restorative materials10.1007/s00784-011-0525-z ↗
31. Evaluation of Surface Roughness of Different Direct Resin-based Composites10.4103/jispcd.JISPCD_72_17 ↗
32. Randomized controlled split-mouth clinical trial of direct laminate veneers with two micro-hybrid resin composites10.1016/j.jdent.2012.05.010 ↗
33. Comparison of two different composite resins used for tooth reshaping and diastema closure in a 4-year follow-up10.4103/njcp.njcp_36_18 ↗
34. Clinical performance of a nanofilled resin composite with and without an intermediary layer of flowable composite: A 2 year evaluation10.1007/s00784-010-0485-8 ↗
35. Bacterial adhesion on orthopedic implants10.1016/j.cis.2020.102228 ↗
36. Bacterial adhesion capacity of protein-terminating polyelectrolyte multilayers10.1016/j.ijadhadh.2020.102687 ↗
37. Metal surface characteristics dictate bacterial adhesion capacity10.1016/j.ijadhadh.2016.01.008 ↗
38. Bacterial adhesion rate on food grade ceramics and Teflon as kitchen worktop surfaces10.1016/j.ijfoodmicro.2020.108764 ↗
39. Available surface dictates microbial adhesion capacity10.1016/j.ijadhadh.2014.01.027 ↗
40. Esthetic restorative materials and glass ionomer cements: Influence of acidic drink exposure on bacterial adhesion10.4103/ejd.ejd_219_17 ↗
41. Influence of opacity on the color stability of a nanocomposite10.1007/s00784-014-1315-1 ↗
42. Theoretical model for scattering of light by dentin and comparison with measurements10.1364/AO.32.000411 ↗
43. The absorption and scattering of light in bovine and human dental enamel10.1007/BF02547285 ↗
44. Color and translucency of in vivo natural central incisors10.1016/S0022-3913(00)70036-9 ↗
45. The effect of red wine on colour stability of three different types of esthetic restorative materials: An in vitro study10.4103/JCD.JCD_293_17 ↗
46. Resin-ionomer restorative materials for children: A review10.1111/j.1834-7819.1999.tb00529.x ↗
47. Discoloration of dental resin composites after immersion in a series of organic and chemical solutions10.1002/jbm.b.30216 ↗
48. Color stability and surface roughness of polished anterior restorative materials10.4012/dmj.2014-344 ↗