Clinical relevance of antimicrobial testing results for dental restorative materials
Clinical relevance of antimicrobial testing results for dental restorative materials
复制标题
DOI：
10.5301/jabfm.5000337
复制
发表时间：
2017-04-01
影响因子：
2.5
通讯作者：
Camilleri, Josette
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Farrugia, Cher;Haider, Julie;Camilleri, Josette
背景资料：修复材料的抗微生物活性与临床相关，因为所有牙科材料都受到含有细菌的环境的影响。本研究旨在调查文献中提到的2种方法的使用，以评估修复材料的抗菌性能，并调查材料性能是否会改变这些传统方法的结果。方法：一些牙科修复材料-即Chemfil上级（R）、Spectrum（R）、Heliobond（R）、Ionoseal（R）、Dyract Extra（R），Smart Dentin Replacement（SDR（R））和Biodentine（R）-通过扫描电子显微镜（SEM）、能量色散光谱（EDS）、X射线衍射（XRD）分析、傅里叶变换红外（FT-IR）光谱和pH分析进行表征。使用琼脂扩散和生物膜积累试验评估抗菌活性。影响结果的关键因素进行了评估，使用协方差analysis of covariance.Results：Biodentine后立即混合和Ionoseal老化6周导致抑制区，而显着更高的麦克法兰读数观察钡的存在时，使用材料Ionoseal，Dyract和SDR在24小时老化。通过协方差分析，结果表明，材料的性能影响的方法results.Conclusions：材料的性能影响结果的抗菌测试，但这可能不直接反映的抗菌潜力的材料的问题。谨慎选择方法和解释结果很重要。
Background: The antimicrobial activity of restorative materials is clinically relevant because all dental materials are subject to an environment containing bacteria. This study aimed to investigate the use of 2 methodologies referred to in the literature to assess antimicrobial properties of restorative materials and investigate whether material properties alter results of these traditional methodologies.Methods: A number of dental restorative materials - namely, Chemfil Superior (R), Spectrum (R), Heliobond (R), Ionoseal (R), Dyract Extra (R), Smart Dentin Replacement (SDR (R)) and Biodentine (R) - were characterized by scanning electron microscopy (SEM), energy-dispersive spectroscopy (EDS), X-ray diffraction (XRD) analysis, Fourier transform infrared (FT-IR) spectroscopy and pH analysis. Antimicrobial activity was assessed using agar diffusion and biofilm accumulation tests. Key factors affecting results were assessed using analysis of covariance.Results: Biodentine after immediate mixing and Ionoseal aged for 6 weeks resulted in an inhibition zone, while significantly higher McFarland readings were observed in the presence of barium when using materials Ionoseal, Dyract and SDR at 24-hour aging. Through analysis of covariance it was shown that material properties affected methodology results.Conclusions: Properties of materials affect results of antimicrobial testing, but this may not directly reflect the antimicrobial potential of the material in question. Careful choice of methodology and interpretation of results is important.