Journal of the korean academy of Pediatric Dentistry (대한소아치과학회지)

Korean Academy of Pediatric Dentistry (대한소아치과학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Surface Roughness and Microbial Adhesion After Finishing of Alkasite Restorative Material

피니싱 처리 이후 알카자이트 수복재의 표면거칠기와 미생물 부착

  • Park, Choa (Department of Pediatric Dentistry, Oral Science Research Center, College of Dentistry, Gangneung-Wonju National University) ;
  • Park, Howon (Department of Pediatric Dentistry, Oral Science Research Center, College of Dentistry, Gangneung-Wonju National University) ;
  • Lee, Juhyun (Department of Pediatric Dentistry, Oral Science Research Center, College of Dentistry, Gangneung-Wonju National University) ;
  • Seo, Hyunwoo (Department of Pediatric Dentistry, Oral Science Research Center, College of Dentistry, Gangneung-Wonju National University) ;
  • Lee, Siyoung (Department of Oral Microbiology, Oral Science Research Center, College of Dentistry, Gangneung-Wonju National University)
  • 박초아 (강릉원주대학교 치과대학소아치과학교실 및 구강과학연구소) ;
  • 박호원 (강릉원주대학교 치과대학소아치과학교실 및 구강과학연구소) ;
  • 이주현 (강릉원주대학교 치과대학소아치과학교실 및 구강과학연구소) ;
  • 서현우 (강릉원주대학교 치과대학소아치과학교실 및 구강과학연구소) ;
  • 이시영 (강릉원주대학교 미생물학 및 면역학교실 및 구강과학연구소)
  • Received : 2019.09.08
  • Accepted : 2019.11.18
  • Published : 2020.05.31
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

This study is aimed to evaluate and compare the surface roughness and microbial adhesion to alkasite restorative material (Cention N), resin-modified glass ionomer (RMGI), and composite resin. And to examine the correlation between bacterial adhesion and surface roughness by different finishing systems. Specimens were fabricated in disk shapes and divided into four groups by finishing methods (control, carbide bur, fine grit diamond bur, and white stone bur). Surface roughness was tested by atomic force microscope and surface observation was performed by scanning electron microscope. Colony forming units were measured after incubating Streptococcus mutans biofilm on specimens using CDC biofilm reactor. Cention N surface roughness was less than 0.2 ㎛ after finishing procedure. Control specimens of resin and Cention N specimens were significantly (p = 0.01) rougher. Pearson correlation coefficient (PCC = 0.13) indicated a weak correlation between surface roughness and S. mutans adhesion to the specimens. Compared with resin specimens, RMGI and Cention N showed lower microbial adhesion. Surface roughness and bacterial adhesion were not significantly different, regardless of the finishing systems.

이 연구는 새롭게 개발된 알카자이트 재료인 Cention N에 finishing처리를 한뒤에 표면 거칠기와 박테리아 부착에 대하여 조사하고자 함이다. 레진강화형 글래스아이오노머와 컴포짓트 레진, 알카자이트 재료를 원통형의 디스크 형태로 제작하였다(n = 48). 이 후 대조군과 3가지 카바이드버, 미세다이아몬드 버, 화이트스톤버의 피니싱 버에 따른 4가지 하위군으로 분류하였다. 표면 거칠기는 atomic force microscope으로 조사하였으며 표면관찰은 scanning electron microscope을 이용하여 진행하였다. 우식원성 미생물인 streptococcus mutans의 시편 부착을 위하여 CDC biofilm reactor를 사용하여 바이오필름을 배양한후 집락형성단위를 측정하였다. 레진과 Cention N의 아무처리 하지 않은 컨트롤 군의 표면 거칠기는 통계적으로 유의하게 피니싱 처리된 시편들보다 거칠었다. 하지만 표면 거칠기와 미생물 부착사이의 상관관계는 매우 약했다(PCC = 0.13). RMGI와 Cention N은 레진시편에 비해 미생물 부착이 적게 일어났다. Cention N은 피니싱만으로도 임상적으로 허용되는 수준인 0.2 ㎛ 이하의 거칠기를 보였으며 이온 방출 성질로 미생물 부착이 레진과 비교시 적은 것을 확인할수 있었다.

Keywords

References

  1. Bharti R, Wadhwani KK, Tikku AP, Chandra A : Dental amalgam: An update. J Conserv Dent, 13:204-208, 2010. https://doi.org/10.4103/0972-0707.73380
  2. A.C.O.S. AFFAIRS : Dental amalgam: Update on safety concerns. J Am Dent Assoc, 129:494-503, 1998. https://doi.org/10.14219/jada.archive.1998.0252
  3. Kaur M, Mann NS, Jhamb A, Batra D : A comparative evaluation of compressive strength of Cention N with glass ionomer cement: An in-vitro study. Int J Appl Dent Sci, 5:5-9, 2019.
  4. Patki B : Direct permanent restoratives-amalgam vs composite. J Evol Med Dent Sci, 46:8912-8918, 2013. https://doi.org/10.14260/jemds/1548
  5. Samanta S, Kumar U, Mitra A : Comparison of microleakage in class V cavity restored with flowable composite resin, glass ionomer cement and cention N. Imp J Interdiscip Res , 3:180-183, 2017.
  6. Jagvinder M, Sunakshi S, Sonal M, Ashok S : Cention N: A review. Int Cur Res, 10:69111-69112, 2018.
  7. Ivoclar Vivadent AG : Cention N. Scientific documentation 2016. Available from URL: https://mena.ivoclarvivadent.com/en-me/download-center/scientific-documentation/#C(Accessed on November 10, 2016).
  8. Debolina C, Chiranjan G, Priti D : Comparative evaluation of fracture resistance of dental amalgam, Z350 composite resin and cention-N restoration in class II cavity. J Dent Med Sci, 17:52-56, 2018.
  9. Kumari CM, Bhat KM, Bansal R : Evaluation of surface roughness of different restorative composites after polishing using atomic force microscopy. J Conserv Dent, 19:56-62, 2018. https://doi.org/10.4103/0972-0707.173200
  10. Setty A, Nagesh J, Ashwathappa GS, et al. : Comparative evaluation of surface roughness of novel resin composite Cention N with Filtek Z350 XT: In vitro study. Int J Oral Care and Res, 7:15-17, 2019. https://doi.org/10.4103/INJO.INJO_9_19
  11. Bollen CM, Lambrechts P, Quirynen M : Comparison of surface roughness of oral hard materials to the threshold surface roughness for bacterial plaque retention: a review of the literature. Dent Mater, 13:258-269, 1997. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0109-5641(97)80038-3
  12. Rai R, Gupta R : In vitro evaluation of the effect of two finishing and polishing systems on four esthetic restorative materials. J Conserv Dent, 16:564-567, 2013. https://doi.org/10.4103/0972-0707.120946
  13. Wilder AD Jr, Swift EJ Jr, McDougal RA, et al. : Effect of finishing technique on the microleakage and surface texture of resin-modified glass ionomer restorative materials. J Dent, 28:367-373, 2000. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0300-5712(99)00075-5
  14. An JS, Kim K, Ahn SJ, et al. : Compositional differences in multi-species biofilms formed on various orthodontic adhesives. Eur J Orthod, 39:528-533, 2017. https://doi.org/10.1093/ejo/cjw089
  15. Svanberg M, Mjor IA, Orstavik D : Mutans Streptococci in plaque from margins of amalgam, composite, and glassionomer restorations. J Dent Res, 69:861-864, 1990. https://doi.org/10.1177/00220345900690030601
  16. de Fucio SB, Puppin-Rontani RM, Garcia-Godoy F, et al. : Analyses of biofilms accumulated on dental restorative materials. Am J Dent, 22:131-136, 2009.
  17. Gama-Teixeira A, Simionato MR, Luz MA, et al. : Streptococcus mutans-induced secondary caries adjacent to glass ionomer cement, composite resin and amalgam restorations in vitro. Braz Oral Res, 21:368-374, 2007. https://doi.org/10.1590/S1806-83242007000400015
  18. Eick S, Glockmann E, Brandl B, Pfister W : Adherence of Streptococcus mutans to various restorative materials in a continuous flow system. J Oral Rehabil, 31:278-285, 2004. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.0305-182X.2003.01233.x
  19. Gupta N, Jaiswal S, Bansal P, et al. : Comparison of fluoride ion release and alkalizing potential of a new bulk-fill alkasite. J Conserv Dent, 22:296-299, 2019. https://doi.org/10.4103/JCD.JCD_74_19
  20. Bayrak GD, Sandalli N, Kulekci G, et al. : Effect of two different polishing systems on fluoride release, surface roughness and bacterial adhesion of newly developed restorative materials. J Esthet Restor Dent, 29:424-434, 2017. https://doi.org/10.1111/jerd.12313