Antibacterial activity of dental restorative material: An in vitro study

Comparative Evaluation of Antimicrobial Effectiveness and Compressive Strength in Neem and Lemongrass-Modified Glass Ionomer Cement: An In Vitro Study

Background Glass ionomer cement (GIC) demonstrates biocompatibility and fluoride ion release, indicating their potential to inhibit a wide range of bacteria, although this remains uncertain. Lemongrass and neem are recognized for their potent antimicrobial activity against numerous pathogenic microorganisms. The objective of the study is to evaluate the antimicrobial effectiveness and compressive strength of GIC modified with neem and lemongrass. Methodology Lemongrass and neem were incorporated into conventional GIC at varying concentrations. Group I - neem-modified GIC (0.5%, 1%, 2%), group II - lemongrass-modified GIC (0.5%, 1%, 2%), and group III (non-modified GIC as a control group). The disk-shaped specimens were then compared to unmodified GIC (control). Antimicrobial effectiveness was assessed using the minimal inhibitory concentration (MIC) assay against Streptococcus mutans and Lactobacillus. Compressive strength was assessed using a Universal Testing Machine, with a crosshead speed set to 0.5 mm per minute. Statistical analysis was conducted with a significance level set at p < 0.05. Results Neem modification displayed superior antimicrobial effectiveness against both Streptococcus mutans and Lactobacillus at all concentrations when compared to the control, with 2% showing the least mean value of 0.262. In contrast, lemongrass modification exhibited a significant difference in effectiveness against Streptococcus mutans but no difference against Lactobacillus. Neem modification demonstrated superior performance compared to lemongrass (p < 0.05). Both modified groups showed no significant impact on compressive strength. Conclusions Neem-modified GIC demonstrated the highest antimicrobial efficacy against Streptococcus mutans and Lactobacillus without altering its compressive strength. This suggests its potential as a promising alternative material in restorative dentistry. Additional in vivo investigations are needed to assess the extended-term effectiveness of the material.

Evaluation of drug release, monomer conversion and surface properties of resin composites containing chlorhexidine-loaded mesoporous and nonporous hydroxyapatite nanocarriers

The aim of this study was to evaluate drug release, degree of conversion (DC), and surface properties of resin composites containing chlorhexidine (CHX)-loaded mesoporous (mHAP) and nonporous hydroxyapatite (HAP) nanocarrier. CHX loaded mHAP and HAP, or CHX without nanocarrier was added into the resin composite in 1% and 5% concentrations. After characterization of experimental materials with XRD, EDX, FT-IR, and SEM, the CHX release on the 1st, 7th, 30th, and 120th days were evaluated by UV-vis spectroscopy. DC, surface roughness, and surface hardness of the samples were also evaluated. The data was statistically analyzed. While mHAP groups released significantly higher CHX on the 30th day (p < .05), there was no statistically significant difference between the HAP and mHAP groups on the 120th day (p > .05). DCs of all groups were similar (p > .05). While mHAP and HAP groups containing 5% CHX showed significantly higher roughness than the other groups (p < .05), no statistically significant difference was observed between the other groups (p > .05). The 1% and 5% CHX groups without nanocarrier showed significantly lower surface hardness (p < .05). However, no statistically significant difference was observed between the other groups in terms of surface hardness (p > .05). A controlled CHX release was achieved by mHAP and HAP nanocarriers for 120 days. The nanocarrier addition up to 5% did not negatively affect the DC and the surface hardness which is one of the surface properties of the resin composites. Although the addition of 5% nanocarrier to the resin composite increased the surface roughness, while adding 1% of these nanocarriers did not change.

Dental restoration selection by students at southern Saudi Arabian universities

Dental caries is a serious oral health concern and restoration of teeth is the main solution to this issue. Various restorative materials having different properties are used for posterior restoration. The aim of this study was to find that which factors can affect the choice of selection of material for posterior restoration among dental graduate students. For this purpose, a questionnaire was shared electronically among students of three different universities (King Khalid University, Jazan University, and Najran University). After collection, data were subjected to a chi-square test to check the significance. It has been observed that almost 50% of participants choose composite resin for posterior restoration. Results showed that according to most (more than 50%) of the dental students in Southern Saudi Arabia, different patient and tooth condition related factors can affect the choice for selection of restorative material.

Adhesive Ability of Different Oral Pathogens to Various Dental Materials: An In Vitro Study

Introduction. In dental treatments, the reason for secondary caries and the failure of root canal treatment is the microbial infection, which concerns most dentists. The challenge of how to reduce the number of bacteria at the filling materials and the number of residual bacteria in the root canal has become a research hotspot. In this study, the bacterial adhesion properties of several common dental materials were compared to provide a theoretical basis for the selection of antibacterial properties of dental materials. Methodology. Three commonly used dental restorative materials and five sealers in root canal treatment were selected. Each material block was immersed in the corresponding supragingival (Streptococcus mutans and Actinomyces viscosus) or subgingival (Porphyromonas gingivalis and Enterococcus faecalis) bacterial solution and cultured under anaerobic conditions at 37°C for 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 20, and 24 h. The adhesion of bacteria was observed, and the number of different bacteria adhering to various material model disks was calculated at different time intervals under a scanning electron microscope. The adherent CFU load of the materials was determined by colony counting. Results. Streptococcus mutans and Actinomyces viscosus exhibited the strongest adhesion ability to the resin material blocks. Porphyromonas gingivalis and Enterococcus faecalis exhibited the highest adhesion ability to the AH-Plus sealer block. Conclusions. In dental treatments, dental materials should be selected based on the chemical, physical, and biological properties of materials. In addition, it is necessary to develop new antibacterial dental materials.