International Journal of Clinical Pediatric Dentistry

Register      Login

VOLUME 18 , ISSUE 2 ( February, 2025 ) > List of Articles

ORIGINAL RESEARCH

Comparative Evaluation of Setting Time and Antibacterial Efficacy of Cinnamic Acid-incorporated Glass Ionomer Cement: An In Vitro Study

Rajakumar Madhuvathani, Selvaraj Vinodh, Veerabadhran Mahesh Mathian, Murugesan Gawthaman, Muthusamy Manoharan, Mohanraj Kamatchi

Keywords : Cinnamic acid, Glass ionomer cement, Lactobacillus acidophilus, Setting time, Streptococcus mutans

Citation Information : Madhuvathani R, Vinodh S, Mathian VM, Gawthaman M, Manoharan M, Kamatchi M. Comparative Evaluation of Setting Time and Antibacterial Efficacy of Cinnamic Acid-incorporated Glass Ionomer Cement: An In Vitro Study. Int J Clin Pediatr Dent 2025; 18 (2):161-166.

DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10005-3042

License: CC BY-NC 4.0

Published Online: 20-03-2025

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2025; The Author(s).


Abstract

Aim and background: Glass ionomer cement (GIC) possess properties to fulfill the prerequisites of a restorative material for atraumatic restorative treatment (ART). Enhancing the antibacterial property of GIC remains the pressing priority to reduce the occurrence of secondary caries. Thus, this study aimed to evaluate and compare the setting time and antibacterial efficacy of cinnamic acid (CA)-incorporated GIC against Streptococcus mutans and Lactobacillus acidophilus. Materials and methods: CA powder was incorporated into the GIC powder in varying concentrations. For testing the setting time, the total samples of 15 disks were divided into five groups, namely—I: control—unmodified GIC, II: 2.5% CA + GIC, III: 5% CA + GIC, IV: 7.5% CA + GIC, and V: 10% CA + GIC. Setting time was evaluated after 30 seconds of mixing the powder and liquid by lowering a flat-end needle indentor. Similarly, for testing the antibacterial efficacy against S. mutans and L. acidophilus, the samples were divided, and 5 disks were allocated to each subgroup. The disks were placed in agar diffusion plates, which were inoculated with cultured test species separately. After 24 hours of incubation, the zone of inhibition (ZOI) was measured. Results: CA-modified GIC exhibited an increase in setting time and ZOI with the increase in concentration of CA, and this difference was found to be statistically significant between the groups. Conclusion: CA-incorporated GIC has greater antibacterial efficacy against the caries-causing bacteria with an acceptable change in setting time. Clinical significance: GIC with higher antibacterial potential can markedly decrease the occurrence of secondary caries and failure of restorations.


PDF Share
  1. Jain E, Pandey RK, Khanna R. Liquorice root extracts as potent cariostatic agents in pediatric practice. J Indian Soc Pedod Prev Dent 2013;31(3):146–152. DOI: 10.4103/0970-4388.117964
  2. Ribeiro M, Malheiro J, Grenho L, et al. Cytotoxicity and antimicrobial action of selected phytochemicals against planktonic and sessile Streptococcus mutans. PeerJ 2018;6:e4872. DOI: 10.7717/peerj.4872
  3. World Health Organization. Global Oral Health Status Report: Towards Universal Health Coverage for Oral Health by 2030. 2022. Available from: https://www.who.int/publications-detail-redirect/9789240061484.
  4. Frencken JE. Evolution of the ART approach: highlights and achievements. J Appl Oral Sci 2009;17:78–83. DOI: 10.1590/s1678-77572009000700014
  5. Sherief DI, Fathi MS, El Fadl RKA. Antimicrobial properties, compressive strength and fluoride release capacity of essential oil-modified glass ionomer cements—an in vitro study. Clin Oral Investig 2021;25:1879–1888. DOI: 10.1007/s00784-020-03493-0
  6. Marti LM, Mata MD, Ferraz-Santos B, et al. Addition of chlorhexidine gluconate to a glass ionomer cement: a study on mechanical, physical and antibacterial properties. Braz Dent J 2014;25:33–37. DOI: 10.1590/0103-6440201302328
  7. Joshi RS, Gokhale NS, Hugar SM, et al. Comparative evaluation of antibacterial efficacy of conventional glass-ionomer cement and bulk-fill alkasite material when combined with doxycycline and double antibiotic paste containing ciprofloxacin and metronidazole against Streptococcus mutans and Lactobacillus spp.: An in vitro study. J Indian Soc Pedod Prev Dent 2020;38(4):361–366. DOI: 10.4103/JISPPD.JISPPD_143_20
  8. Farrugia C, Camilleri J. Antimicrobial properties of conventional restorative filling materials and advances in antimicrobial properties of composite resins and glass ionomer cements—a literature review. Dent Mater 2015;31(4):e89–e99. DOI: 10.1016/j.dental.2014.12.005
  9. Sova M. Antioxidant and antimicrobial activities of cinnamic acid derivatives. Mini Rev Med Chem 2012;12(8):749–767. DOI: 10.2174/138955712801264792
  10. ISO B. 9917-1:2003. Dental Water-based Cements. United Kingdom: International Organization for Standardization:1–21.
  11. Shafaee H, Khosropanah H, Rahimi H, et al. Effects of adding cinnamon, ZnO, and CuO nanoparticles on the antibacterial properties of a glass ionomer cement as the luting agent for orthodontic bands and their cytotoxicity. J Compos Sci 2022;6(11):336. DOI: 10.3390/jcs6110336
  12. Holder IA, Boyce ST. Agar well diffusion assay testing of bacterial susceptibility to various antimicrobials in concentrations non-toxic for human cells in culture. Burns 1994;20(5):426–429. DOI: 10.1016/0305-4179(94)90035-3
  13. Elsharkawy SM, Gomaa YF, Gamal R. Experimental glass ionomer cement containing gallic acid: antibacterial effect and fluoride release an in vitro study. Open Access Maced J Med Sci 2022;10(D):131–136. DOI: 10.3889/oamjms.2022.8694
  14. Bhanushali S, Srilatha KT, Girish MS. Antimicrobial efficacy of cinnamon bark oil on Lactobacillus acidophilus and its effect on compressive strength of glass ionomer cement. World J Dent 2015;8(3):164–170. DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10015-1432
  15. Somani R, Jaidka S, Singh DJ, et al. Comparative evaluation of shear bond strength of various glass ionomer cements to dentin of primary teeth: an in vitro study. Int J Clin Pediatr Dent 2016;9(3):192–196. DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10005-1362
  16. Prentice LH, Tyas M, Burrow MF. The effect of oxalic acid incorporation on the setting time and strength of a glass-ionomer cement. Acta Biomater 2006;2(1):109–112. DOI: 10.1016/j.actbio.2005.08.007
  17. PubChem. PubChem Compound Summary for CID 444539, Cinnamic Acid. Bethesda (MD): National Library of Medicine (US), National Center for Biotechnology Information; 2004. Available from: https://pubchem.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/compound/Cinnamic-Acid.
  18. Hu Y, Guo Y, Li B, et al. Influence of the pKa value of cinnamic acid and P-hydroxycinnamic acid on the solubility of a Lurasidone hydrochloride-based coamorphous system. ACS Omega 2021;6(4):3106–3119. DOI: 10.1021/acsomega.0c05510
  19. Crisp S, Wilson AD. Reactions in glass ionomer cements: V. effect of incorporating tartaric acid in the cement liquid. J Dent Res 1976;55(6):1023–1031. DOI: 10.1177/00220345760550060401
  20. Hill RG, Wilson AD. A rheological study of the role of additives on the setting of glass-ionomer cements. J Dent Res 1988;67(12):1446–1450. DOI: 10.1177/00220345880670120101
  21. Baker JL, Faustoferri RC, Quivey RG Jr. Acid-adaptive mechanisms of Streptococcus mutans—the more we know, the more we don't. Mol Oral Microbiol 2017;32(2):107–117. DOI: 10.1111/omi.12162
  22. Corcoran BM, Stanton C, Fitzgerald GF, et al. Survival of probiotic lactobacilli in acidic environments is enhanced in the presence of metabolizable sugars. Appl Environ Microbiol 2005;71(6):3060–3067. DOI: 10.1128/AEM.71.6.3060-3067.2005
  23. Hutkins RW, Nannen NL. pH homeostasis in lactic acid bacteria. J Dairy Sci 1993;76(8):2354–2365. DOI: 10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(93)77573-6
PDF Share
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.