Evaluation of physical-mechanical properties, antibacterial effect, and cytotoxicity of temporary restorative materials

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: Peralta, Sonia Luque
Data de Publicação: 2022
Outros Autores: Leles, Sávio Bisinoto de, Dutra, André Lindemann, Guimarães, Victoria Burmann da Silva, Piva, Evandro, Lund, Rafael Guerra
Tipo de documento: Artigo
Idioma: eng
Título da fonte: Journal of applied oral science (Online)
Texto Completo: https://www.revistas.usp.br/jaos/article/view/202899
Resumo: The objective of this study was to compare selective physical-mechanical properties, antibacterial effects and cytotoxicity of seven temporary restorative materials (TRM): five resin-based materials [Bioplic (B), Fill Magic Tempo (FM), Fermit inlay (F), Luxatemp LC (L) and Revotek LC (R)], and zinc oxide-eugenol cement (IRM) and glass ionomer cement (GIC) as the controls. Material and methods: The physical-mechanical properties were evaluated by determining microleakage (ML), ultimate tensile strength (UTS) and Shore D hardness (SDH). In addition, the polymerization rate (Pr-1), depth of cure (DC), water sorption and solubility (WS/SL) were evaluated. The antimicrobial effects of the materials were assessed by biofilm accumulation of Streptococcus mutans (BT) and the direct contact test (DCT) by exposure to Enterococcus faecalis for 1 and 24 h, and cytotoxicity by MTT assay. The data were analyzed by ANOVA or Kruskall-Wallis tests, and a complementary post-hoc method (p<0.05). Results: Group B, followed by FM and GIC had significantly lower percentages of microleakage in comparison with the other groups; Groups FM and L showed the highest WS, while Groups R and FM showed the significantly lowest SL values (p<0.05). Group R showed the statistically highest UTS mean and the lowest DC mean among all groups. Group F showed the lowest S. mutans biofilm accumulation (p=0.023). Only the Group L showed continued effect against E. faecalis after 1 h and 24 h in DCT. The L showed statistically lower viability cell when compared to the other groups. Conclusions: These findings suggest the antibacterial effect of the temporary materials Fill Magic and Bioplic against S. mutans, while Luxatemp showed in vitro inhibition of S. mutans biofilm accumulation and E. faecalis growth. Regarding the cell viability test, Luxatemp was the most cytotoxic and Fill Magic was shown to be the least cytotoxic.
id USP-17_bc6cac8bb187a1e39d9e0c1d65a4d5df
oai_identifier_str oai:revistas.usp.br:article/202899
network_acronym_str USP-17
network_name_str Journal of applied oral science (Online)
repository_id_str
spelling Evaluation of physical-mechanical properties, antibacterial effect, and cytotoxicity of temporary restorative materialsTemporary dental restorationDental leakageSolubilityMicrobiologyThe objective of this study was to compare selective physical-mechanical properties, antibacterial effects and cytotoxicity of seven temporary restorative materials (TRM): five resin-based materials [Bioplic (B), Fill Magic Tempo (FM), Fermit inlay (F), Luxatemp LC (L) and Revotek LC (R)], and zinc oxide-eugenol cement (IRM) and glass ionomer cement (GIC) as the controls. Material and methods: The physical-mechanical properties were evaluated by determining microleakage (ML), ultimate tensile strength (UTS) and Shore D hardness (SDH). In addition, the polymerization rate (Pr-1), depth of cure (DC), water sorption and solubility (WS/SL) were evaluated. The antimicrobial effects of the materials were assessed by biofilm accumulation of Streptococcus mutans (BT) and the direct contact test (DCT) by exposure to Enterococcus faecalis for 1 and 24 h, and cytotoxicity by MTT assay. The data were analyzed by ANOVA or Kruskall-Wallis tests, and a complementary post-hoc method (p<0.05). Results: Group B, followed by FM and GIC had significantly lower percentages of microleakage in comparison with the other groups; Groups FM and L showed the highest WS, while Groups R and FM showed the significantly lowest SL values (p<0.05). Group R showed the statistically highest UTS mean and the lowest DC mean among all groups. Group F showed the lowest S. mutans biofilm accumulation (p=0.023). Only the Group L showed continued effect against E. faecalis after 1 h and 24 h in DCT. The L showed statistically lower viability cell when compared to the other groups. Conclusions: These findings suggest the antibacterial effect of the temporary materials Fill Magic and Bioplic against S. mutans, while Luxatemp showed in vitro inhibition of S. mutans biofilm accumulation and E. faecalis growth. Regarding the cell viability test, Luxatemp was the most cytotoxic and Fill Magic was shown to be the least cytotoxic.Universidade de São Paulo. Faculdade de Odontologia de Bauru2022-09-26info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionapplication/pdfhttps://www.revistas.usp.br/jaos/article/view/20289910.1590/1678-7757-2017-0562 Journal of Applied Oral Science; Vol. 26 (2018); e20170562Journal of Applied Oral Science; Vol. 26 (2018); e20170562Journal of Applied Oral Science; v. 26 (2018); e201705621678-77651678-7757reponame:Journal of applied oral science (Online)instname:Universidade de São Paulo (USP)instacron:USPenghttps://www.revistas.usp.br/jaos/article/view/202899/186951Copyright (c) 2022 Journal of Applied Oral Sciencehttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessPeralta, Sonia LuqueLeles, Sávio Bisinoto deDutra, André LindemannGuimarães, Victoria Burmann da SilvaPiva, EvandroLund, Rafael Guerra 2022-09-26T13:17:24Zoai:revistas.usp.br:article/202899Revistahttp://www.scielo.br/jaosPUBhttps://www.revistas.usp.br/jaos/oai||jaos@usp.br1678-77651678-7757opendoar:2022-09-26T13:17:24Journal of applied oral science (Online) - Universidade de São Paulo (USP)false
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Evaluation of physical-mechanical properties, antibacterial effect, and cytotoxicity of temporary restorative materials
title Evaluation of physical-mechanical properties, antibacterial effect, and cytotoxicity of temporary restorative materials
spellingShingle Evaluation of physical-mechanical properties, antibacterial effect, and cytotoxicity of temporary restorative materials
Peralta, Sonia Luque
Temporary dental restoration
Dental leakage
Solubility
Microbiology
title_short Evaluation of physical-mechanical properties, antibacterial effect, and cytotoxicity of temporary restorative materials
title_full Evaluation of physical-mechanical properties, antibacterial effect, and cytotoxicity of temporary restorative materials
title_fullStr Evaluation of physical-mechanical properties, antibacterial effect, and cytotoxicity of temporary restorative materials
title_full_unstemmed Evaluation of physical-mechanical properties, antibacterial effect, and cytotoxicity of temporary restorative materials
title_sort Evaluation of physical-mechanical properties, antibacterial effect, and cytotoxicity of temporary restorative materials
author Peralta, Sonia Luque
author_facet Peralta, Sonia Luque
Leles, Sávio Bisinoto de
Dutra, André Lindemann
Guimarães, Victoria Burmann da Silva
Piva, Evandro
Lund, Rafael Guerra
author_role author
author2 Leles, Sávio Bisinoto de
Dutra, André Lindemann
Guimarães, Victoria Burmann da Silva
Piva, Evandro
Lund, Rafael Guerra
author2_role author
author
author
author
author
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv Peralta, Sonia Luque
Leles, Sávio Bisinoto de
Dutra, André Lindemann
Guimarães, Victoria Burmann da Silva
Piva, Evandro
Lund, Rafael Guerra
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv Temporary dental restoration
Dental leakage
Solubility
Microbiology
topic Temporary dental restoration
Dental leakage
Solubility
Microbiology
description The objective of this study was to compare selective physical-mechanical properties, antibacterial effects and cytotoxicity of seven temporary restorative materials (TRM): five resin-based materials [Bioplic (B), Fill Magic Tempo (FM), Fermit inlay (F), Luxatemp LC (L) and Revotek LC (R)], and zinc oxide-eugenol cement (IRM) and glass ionomer cement (GIC) as the controls. Material and methods: The physical-mechanical properties were evaluated by determining microleakage (ML), ultimate tensile strength (UTS) and Shore D hardness (SDH). In addition, the polymerization rate (Pr-1), depth of cure (DC), water sorption and solubility (WS/SL) were evaluated. The antimicrobial effects of the materials were assessed by biofilm accumulation of Streptococcus mutans (BT) and the direct contact test (DCT) by exposure to Enterococcus faecalis for 1 and 24 h, and cytotoxicity by MTT assay. The data were analyzed by ANOVA or Kruskall-Wallis tests, and a complementary post-hoc method (p<0.05). Results: Group B, followed by FM and GIC had significantly lower percentages of microleakage in comparison with the other groups; Groups FM and L showed the highest WS, while Groups R and FM showed the significantly lowest SL values (p<0.05). Group R showed the statistically highest UTS mean and the lowest DC mean among all groups. Group F showed the lowest S. mutans biofilm accumulation (p=0.023). Only the Group L showed continued effect against E. faecalis after 1 h and 24 h in DCT. The L showed statistically lower viability cell when compared to the other groups. Conclusions: These findings suggest the antibacterial effect of the temporary materials Fill Magic and Bioplic against S. mutans, while Luxatemp showed in vitro inhibition of S. mutans biofilm accumulation and E. faecalis growth. Regarding the cell viability test, Luxatemp was the most cytotoxic and Fill Magic was shown to be the least cytotoxic.
publishDate 2022
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2022-09-26
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv https://www.revistas.usp.br/jaos/article/view/202899
10.1590/1678-7757-2017-0562
url https://www.revistas.usp.br/jaos/article/view/202899
identifier_str_mv 10.1590/1678-7757-2017-0562
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv eng
language eng
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv https://www.revistas.usp.br/jaos/article/view/202899/186951
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv Copyright (c) 2022 Journal of Applied Oral Science
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
rights_invalid_str_mv Copyright (c) 2022 Journal of Applied Oral Science
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv application/pdf
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Universidade de São Paulo. Faculdade de Odontologia de Bauru
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Universidade de São Paulo. Faculdade de Odontologia de Bauru
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv Journal of Applied Oral Science; Vol. 26 (2018); e20170562
Journal of Applied Oral Science; Vol. 26 (2018); e20170562
Journal of Applied Oral Science; v. 26 (2018); e20170562
1678-7765
1678-7757
reponame:Journal of applied oral science (Online)
instname:Universidade de São Paulo (USP)
instacron:USP
instname_str Universidade de São Paulo (USP)
instacron_str USP
institution USP
reponame_str Journal of applied oral science (Online)
collection Journal of applied oral science (Online)
repository.name.fl_str_mv Journal of applied oral science (Online) - Universidade de São Paulo (USP)
repository.mail.fl_str_mv ||jaos@usp.br
_version_ 1800221683256131584