International Journal of Clinical Pediatric Dentistry

Register      Login

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

Original Article

Comparative Evaluation of the Antimicrobial Properties of Glass Ionomer Cements with and without Chlorhexidine Gluconate

Josna Vinutha Yadiki, Sharada Reddy Jampanapalli, Hema Chandrika Inguva, Vamsi Krishna Chimata

Keywords : Antimicrobial properties, Chlorhexidine gluconate, Glass ionomer cements

Citation Information : Yadiki JV, Jampanapalli SR, Inguva HC, Chimata VK. Comparative Evaluation of the Antimicrobial Properties of Glass Ionomer Cements with and without Chlorhexidine Gluconate. Int J Clin Pediatr Dent 2016; 9 (2):99-103.

DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10005-1342

License: CC BY-NC 4.0

Published Online: 01-06-2016

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


Abstract

Background: Chlorhexidine gluconate is a widely used antimicrobial agent. Adding chlorhexidine and quaternary ammonium compounds to filling materials, such as composite resins, acrylic resins, and glass ionomer cements increases the antibacterial property of restorative materials. This study includes antibacterial property of glass ionomer restorative cements with chlorhexidine gluconate. Aim: The primary objective of our study was to compare the antimicrobial properties of two commercially available glass ionomer cements with and without chlorhexidine gluconate on strains of mutans streptococci. Materials and methods: Two glass ionomers (Fuji II Conventional and Fuji IX) were used. Chlorhexidine gluconate was mixed with glass ionomer cements, and antimicrobial properties against mutans streptococci were assessed by agar diffusion. The tested bacterial strain was inhibited and the antimicrobial properties decreased with time. Results: The highest amount of antimicrobial activity with mean inhibitory zone was found in Fuji II with chlorhexidine gluconate followed by Fuji IX with chlorhexidine gluconate, Fuji II without chlorhexidine gluconate, and Fuji IX without chlorhexidine gluconate. Conclusion: The results of the study confirmed that the addition of 5% chlorhexidine gluconate to Fuji II and Fuji IX glass ionomer cements resulted in a restorative material that had increased antimicrobial properties over the conventional glass ionomer cements alone for Streptococcus mutans. How to cite this article: Yadiki JV, Jampanapalli SR, Konda S, Inguva HC, Chimata VK. Comparative Evaluation of the Antimicrobial Properties of Glass Ionomer Cements with and without Chlorhexidine Gluconate. Int J Clin Pediatr Dent 2016;9(2):99-103.


PDF Share
  1. Marthaler TM. Changes in dental caries. Caries Res 2004 May-Jun;38(3):173-181.
  2. Seppa L, Toppa-Saarinen E, Luoma H. Effect of different glass ionomers on the acid production and electrolyte metabolism of streptococcus mutans Ingbritt. Caries Res 1992; 26(6):434-438.
  3. Forss H, Jokinen J, Spets-Happonen S, Seppa L, Luoma H. Fluoride and mutans streptococci in plaque grown on glass ionomer and composite. Caries Res 1991 Feb;25(6):454-458.
  4. Imazato S. Antibacterial properties of resin composites and dentin bonding systems. Dent Mater 2003 Sep;19(6): 449-457.
  5. Davies GE, Francis J, Martin AR, Rose FL, Swain G. 1:6-di- 4’-chlorophenyl-diguanidohexane (Hibitane). Laboratory investigation of a new antibacterial agent of high potency. Br J Pharmacol Chemother 1954 Jun;9(2):192-196.
  6. Gjermo P. Chlorhexidine and related compounds. J Dent Res 1989;68(special issue):1602-1608.
  7. Shashibhushan KK, Basappa N, Subba Reddy VV. Comparison of antibacterial activity of three fluorides and zinc releasing commercial glass ionomer cements on strains of mutans streptococci: an in vitro study. J Indian Soc Pedod Prev Dent 2008;26(Suppl 2):S56-S61.
  8. Vermeersch G, Leloup G, Delmee M, Vreven J. Antibacterial activity of glass-ionomers, compomers and resin composites: relationship between acidity and material setting phase. J Oral Rehabil 2005 May;32(5):368-374.
  9. Emilson CG. Potential efficacy of chlorhexidine against mutans streptococci and dental caries. J Dental Res 1994 Mar; 73(3):682-691.
  10. Luoma H, Murtomaa H, Nuuja T, Nyman A, Nummikoski P, Ainamo J, Luoma AR. A simultaneous reduction of caries and gingivitis in a group of school children receiving chlorhexidine-fluoride applications. Results after 2 years. Caries Res 1978;12(5):290-298.
  11. Türkün LS, Türkün M, Ertuðrul F, Ateþ M, Brugger S. Long-term antibacterial effects and physical properties of a chlorhexidinecontaining glass ionomer cement. J Esthet Restor Dent 2008 Feb;20(1):29-44.
  12. Jedrychowski JR, Caputo AA, Kerper S. Antibacterial and mechanical properties of restorative materials combined with chlorhexidine. J Oral Rehabil 1983;10:373-381.
  13. Takahashi Y, Imazato S, Kaneshiro AV, Ebisu S, Frencken JE, Tay FR. Antibacterial effects and physical properties of glassionomers cements containing chlorhexidine for the ART approach. Dent Mater 2006 Jul;22(7):647-652.
  14. Sanders BJ, Gregory RL, Moore K, Avery DR. Antibacterial and physical properties of resin-modified glass-ionomers combined with chlorhexidine. J Oral Rehabil 2002 Jun;29(6):553-558.
  15. Botelho MG. Inhibitory effects on selected oral bacteria of antibacterial agents incorporated in a glass ionomer cement. Caries Res 2003 Mar-Apr;37(2):108-114.
  16. Frencken JE, Imazato S, Toi C, Mulder J, Mickenautsch S, Takahashi Y, Ebisu S. Antibacterial effect of chlorhexidinecontaining glass ionomer cement in vivo: a pilot study. Caries Res 2007 Feb;41(2):102-107.
PDF Share
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.