Antibiofilm and antimicrobial activity of temporary filling materials on root canals: an in situ acid challenge

The present study evaluated the antibiofilm and antimicrobial effects of temporary restorative materials on root canals after an intra-oral challenge. Seventy roots were endodontically treated and divided into 5 groups: high-viscosity glass ionomer (HV-GIC), light-activated glass ionomer (RM-GIC), z...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Brazilian journal of microbiology 2023-12, Vol.54 (4), p.2781-2789
Main Authors: Silva-Neto, Reinaldo Dias, Pelozo, Laís Lima, Corona, Silmara Aparecida, Salvador, Sérgio Luiz de Souza, Sousa-Neto, Manoel Damião, Souza-Gabriel, Aline Evangelista
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Anti-Infective Agents
Antimicrobial activity
Antimicrobial agents
Biofilms
Biomedical and Life Sciences
Clinical Microbiology - Research Paper
Dental cement
Dental Pulp Cavity
Endodontics
Eugenol
Food Microbiology
Humans
Ionomers
Life Sciences
Medical Microbiology
Microbial Ecology
Microbial Genetics and Genomics
Microbiology
Mycology
Root canals
Silicon Dioxide
Sucrose
Variance analysis
Zinc
Zinc Oxide-Eugenol Cement - pharmacology
Citations: Items that this one cites
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:The present study evaluated the antibiofilm and antimicrobial effects of temporary restorative materials on root canals after an intra-oral challenge. Seventy roots were endodontically treated and divided into 5 groups: high-viscosity glass ionomer (HV-GIC), light-activated glass ionomer (RM-GIC), zinc-oxide cement without eugenol (ZO), zinc-oxide cement with eugenol (ZOE), and unsealed roots (negative control). For 28 days, 14 participants used intra-oral devices with five roots, and drops of sucrose were applied onto them. The amount of biofilm and the bacterial counts were analyzed by Kruskal–Wallis and Dunn, and by two-way ANOVA and Tukey (α = 0.05). HV-GIC and RM-GIC better inhibit biofilm, followed by ZO and ZOE. Unsealed roots had the largest biofilm accumulation ( p = 0.002) and higher bacterial penetration than restored roots ( p = 0.023). A low amount of Streptococcus was found in RM-GIC and ZOE-restored roots without difference from HV-GIC ( p = 0.021). The low amount of Enterococcus ( p = 0.003) was found in the ZOE-restored roots, without difference from GICs.
ISSN:1517-8382
1678-4405
1678-4405
DOI:10.1007/s42770-023-01103-1