International Journal of Clinical Pediatric Dentistry

Register      Login

SEARCH WITHIN CONTENT

FIND ARTICLE

Volume / Issue

Online First

Archive
Volume  17 (2024)
Volume  16 (2023)
Volume  15 (2022)
Volume  14 (2021)
Volume  13 (2020)
Volume  12 (2019)
Volume  11 (2018)
Volume  10 (2017)
Volume  9 (2016)
Volume  8 (2015)
Volume  7 (2014)
Volume  6 (2013)
Volume  5 (2012)
Volume  4 (2011)
Volume  3 (2010)
Volume  2 (2009)
Volume  1 (2008)
Related articles

VOLUME 9 , ISSUE 2 ( April-June, 2016 ) > List of Articles

Original Article

Comparative Evaluation of the Antibacterial Efficacy of Type II Glass Ionomer Cement, Type IX Glass Ionomer Cement, and AMALGOMER™ Ceramic Reinforcement by Modified “Direct Contact Test”: An in vitro Study

Harsha G Assudani, Vidyavathi Patil, Pratibha Kukreja

Keywords : AMALGOMER™ CR, Glass ionomer cement, Modified direct contact test, Streptococcus mutans

Citation Information : Assudani HG, Patil V, Kukreja P. Comparative Evaluation of the Antibacterial Efficacy of Type II Glass Ionomer Cement, Type IX Glass Ionomer Cement, and AMALGOMER™ Ceramic Reinforcement by Modified “Direct Contact Test”: An in vitro Study. Int J Clin Pediatr Dent 2016; 9 (2):114-117.

DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10005-1345

License: CC BY-NC 4.0

Published Online: 01-02-2019

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2016; The Author(s).


Abstract

Background: Streptococcus mutans (ATCC25175) has a profound effect on the incidence of dental decay in the human population. Many studies have been performed to assess the antimicrobial activity of different cements. However, little or no information is available about the antibacterial properties of Type II glass ionomer cement (GIC), Type IX GIC, and AMALGOMER™ ceramic reinforcement (CR). Aim: To comparatively evaluate the antibacterial activity of Type II GIC, Type IX GIC, and AMALGOMER™ CR by modified direct contact test. Materials and methods: The total sample size was 72 which was divided into four study groups. Six wells were coated by each: Type II GIC, Type IX GIC, AMALGOMER™ CR, and control group (only S. mutans). Statistical analysis was done using analysis of variance and the intergroup comparison was done using post hoc Tukey test. Results: AMALGOMER™ CR was found to have a better antibacterial effect as compared with Type II and IX GIC. Conclusion: AMALGOMER™ CR can serve as a valuable cement in pediatric dentistry due to its anticariogenic property. How to cite this article: Hugar SM, Assudani HG, Patil V, Kukreja P, Uppin C, Thakkar P. Comparative Evaluation of the Antibacterial Efficacy of Type II Glass Ionomer Cement, Type IX Glass Ionomer Cement, and AMALGOMER™ Ceramic Reinforcement by Modified “Direct Contact Test”: An in vitro Study. Int J Clin Pediatr Dent 2016;9(2):114-117.

PDF Share
  1. Gordon, N. Understanding dental caries. 1st ed. Vol. 1. Basel: Karger Publications; 1985.
  2. Coogan MM, Creaven PJ. Antibacterial properties of eight dental cements. Int Endod J 1993 Nov;26(6):355-361.
  3. Lewinstein I, Matalon S, Slutzkey S, Weiss EI. Antibacterial properties of aged dental cements evaluated by direct-contact and agar diffusion tests. J Prosthet Dent 2005 Apr;93(4):364-371.
  4. Weiss EI, Shalhav M, Fuss Z. Assessment of antibacterial activity of endodontic sealers by a direct contact test. Endod Dent Traumatol 1996 Aug;12(4):179-184.
  5. Pretty IA, Smith PW, Edgar WM, Higham SM. Detection of in vitro demineralization adjacent to restorations using quantitative light induced fluorescence. Dent Mater 2003 Jul;19(5):368-374.
  6. Gabriela LSF, Freires IDA, Alves LA, Jovito VdeC, de Carvalho FG, de Castro RD. Antibacterial activity of glass ionomer cements on cariogenic bacteria—an in vitro study. Int J Dental Clin 2011 Jul-Sep:3(3):1-3.
  7. Billington R. Glass ionomer come of age. Dentist 2004;June:2-3.
  8. Zhang H, Shen Y, Ruse ND, Haapasalo M. Antibacterial activity of endodontic sealers by modified direct contact test against Enterococcus faecalis. J Endod 2009 Jul;35(7):1051-1055.
  9. Topcuoglu N, Ozan F, Ozyurt M, Kulekci G. In vitro antibacterial effects of glass-ionomer cement containing ethanolic extract of propolis on Streptococcus mutans. Eur J Dent 2012Oct;6(4):428-433.
  10. Dunne SM, Goolnik JS, Millar BJ, Seddon RP. Caries inhibition by a resin-modified and a conventional glass ionomer cement, in vitro. J Dent 1996 Jan-Mar;24(1-2):91-94.
  11. ten Cate JM, van Duinen RN. Hypermineralization of dentinal lesions adjacent to glass-ionomer cement restorations. J Dent Res 1995 Jun;74(6):1266-1271.
  12. Mukai M, Ikeda M, Yanagihara T, Hara G, Kato K, Nakagaki H, Robinson C. Fluoride uptake in human dentine from glassionomer cement in vivo. Arch Oral Biol 1993 Dec;38(12): 1093-1098.
PDF Share
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.