Chlorhexidine release from an experimental glass ionomer cement

Palmer, G.; Jones, F.H.; Billington, R.W.; Pearson, G.J.

doi:10.1016/j.biomaterials.2003.12.051

Cited by 102 publications

(132 citation statements)

References 15 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

120

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…According to Palmer et al 5 ., GICs have the potential of slowly releasing active agents, such as fluoride 24 , and the CHX incorporated into GICS can be similarly released into the oral cavity. This association is aimed at reducing severity and frequency of secondary caries by decreasing failures and unsuccessful use of these restorative materials 6,7,12,25 .…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…It is known that chlorhexidine (CHX) can be released into the oral cavity 5 , thus being incorporated to GICs in order to potentialise the antibacterial effect of this material 5,6 . CHX stands out for its proven effectiveness against wide spectrum of pathogens oral cavity 7,8 and low toxicity 9 .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Adding CHX to GIC can result in changes in the material's mechanical properties because its micro-structure is affected 5 . Factors such as integrity of the interface between glass particles and polymeric matrix, size of the particles, amount and size of the pores in the material all play an important role in determining the mechanical properties 7,10 such as compressive strength 10 .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Studies have been carried out in order to incorporate antibacterial agents to GICs 3,5,6,7,[11][12][13][14] , such as CHX at different concentrations, showing effective results for certain microorganisms under in vitro conditions (Streptococcus mutans) 3,6,12 . Nevertheless, the incorporation of antibacterial agents into restorative materials can result in changes in their physical properties depending the concentration used 3,5,6 .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Nevertheless, the incorporation of antibacterial agents into restorative materials can result in changes in their physical properties depending the concentration used 3,5,6 .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Effect of chlorhexidine gluconate on porosity and compressive strength of a glass ionomer cement

Marti

Azevedo

Mata

et al. 2014

Rev. odontol. UNESP

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ResumoIntrodução: Por apresentar ampla atividade antibacteriana, a clorexidina (CHX) tem sido amplamente utilizada em odontologia, podendo ser facilmente incorporada ao cimento de ionômero de vidro (CIV) e liberada consequentemente na cavidade bucal. Objetivo: O objetivo neste estudo foi avaliar a porosidade e resistência à compressão de um CIV, ao qual foi adicionado diferentes concentrações de CHX. Material e método: Os espécimes foram preparados com CIV (Ketac Molar Esaymix) e divididos em 4 grupos de acordo com a concentração de CHX: controle, 0,5% e 1% e 2% (n=10). Para análise dos poros os espécimes foram fraturados com auxílio de martelo e cinzel cirúrgicos, de modo que a fratura era realizada no centro do corpo de prova, dividindo-o ao meio e as imagens obtidas no microscópio eletrônico de varredura (MEV) analisadas no software Image J. O teste de resistência à compressão foi realizado na máquina de ensaios mecânicos (EMIC -Equipamentos e Sistemas de Ensaios Ltda, São José dos Pinhais, PR, Brazil). A análise estatística foi realizada por ANOVA, complementada pelo teste de Tukey. Nível de significância adotado de 5%. Resultado: Não se observou alteração estatisticamente significante entre os grupos estudados tanto para o número de poros quanto para a resistência à compressão. Conclusão: O uso de CIV associado ao gluconato de CLX a 1% e 2% é a melhor opção para ser utilizada na clínica odontológica. Descritores: Cimentos de ionômeros de vidro; clorexidina; porosidade. AbstractIntroduction: For presenting wide antibacterial activity, chlorhexidine (CHX) has been extensively used in dentistry and can be easily incorporated into the glass ionomer cement (GIC) and consequently released into the oral cavity. Aim: The aim of this study was porosity and compression strength of a GIC, that was added to different concentrations of CHX. Material and method: Specimens were prepared with GIC (Ketac Molar Esaymix) and divided into 4 groups according to the concentration of CHX: control, 0.5% and 1% and 2% (n = 10). For analysis of pores specimens were fractured with the aid of hammer and chisel surgical, so that the fracture was performed in the center of the specimens, dividing it in half and images were obtained from a scanning electron microscope (SEM) analyzed in Image J software. The compressive strength test was conducted in a mechanical testing machine (EMIC -Equipment and Testing Systems Ltd., Joseph of the Pines, PR, Brazil). Statistical analysis was performed by ANOVA, Tukey test. Significance level of 5%. Result: No statistically significant changes between the study groups was observed both for the number of pores as well as for the compressive strength. Conclusion: The use of GIC associated with CHX gluconate 1% and 2% is the best option to be used in dental practice.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Nevertheless, the incorporation of antibacterial agents into restorative materials can result in changes in their physical properties depending the concentration used 3,5,6 .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Effect of chlorhexidine gluconate on porosity and compressive strength of a glass ionomer cement

Marti

Azevedo

Mata

et al. 2014

Rev. odontol. UNESP

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Antibacterial effects of 4‐META/MMA‐TBB resin containing chlorhexidine

et al. 2009

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study evaluated the antibacterial effects of 4-acryloyloxyethyl trimellitate anhydride/methyl methacrylate-tri-n-butylborane (4-META/MMA-TBB) resin containing chlorhexidine (CHX) digluconate. The CHX was incorporated into the resins at varying concentrations from 0.0 (control) to 3.0%. The antibacterial effect of each resin against seven microorganisms was examined using agar diffusion tests. Growth inhibition of two streptococci was also tested in brain heart infusion (BHI) liquid broth containing each resin. Release of CHX was analyzed using HPLC, and enamel and dentin bond strengths of each resin were measured. In the agar diffusion tests, growth of all the microorganisms was inhibited by the resin specimens containing CHX at 1.0% or higher except for Enterococcus faecalis. There was greater sensitivity in Streptococcus mutans and Streptococcus sobrinus than in the other bacteria tested. Complete growth inhibition of these two streptococci was observed in BHI liquid broth containing 1.0-1.5% or greater CHX-incorporated resin. According to HPLC analysis, 1.0% and 1.5% CHX-containing resins released means of 3.63 and 8.59 microg/mL of CHX, respectively. Specimens with 0.5-1.5% and 0.5-2.0% CHX exhibited no significant reduction in enamel and dentin bond strengths, respectively, when compared to the control (p > 0.05). This in vitro study suggested that incorporation of 1.0-1.5% CHX digluconate into the 4-META resin is optimal in terms of antibacterial effects and bond strength to the tooth.

show abstract

Chlorhexidine release and antibacterial properties of chlorhexidine‐incorporated polymethyl methacrylate‐based resin cement

et al. 2010

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study evaluated chlorhexidine release from experimental, chlorhexidine-incorporated polymethyl methacrylate (PMMA)-based resin cements prepared from Super-Bond C&B (Sun Medical) and examined the antimicrobial activity against Streptococcus mutans and Enterococcus faecalis. Chlorhexidine diacetate was added into PMMA polymer to obtain chlorhexidine concentration of 0.0, 1.0, 2.0, 3.0, and 4.0 wt %. Chlorhexidine-incorporated, cured resin disks were immersed in distilled water at 37 degrees C for 5 weeks, and the chlorhexidine release was analyzed by high-performance liquid chromatography. The antibacterial effect of freshly mixed resin cements was examined using the agar diffusion test. For the direct contact test, the wells (n = 6) of microtiter plates were coated with cements. The coated wells were aged up to 3 weeks prior to the placement of bacterial suspensions directly on cured cements. The 3.0 and 4.0% chlorhexidine-incorporated cement exhibited chlorhexidine release for 5 weeks; however, more than 98% of chlorhexidine was retained in resin matrix. No release was detected from the 1.0 and 2.0% incorporated cement at 1 week and 2 weeks, respectively. The agar diffusion test failed to detect antibacterial effects against Enterococcus faecalis, whereas the direct contact test revealed the antibacterial effect of 3.0 and 4.0% incorporated cements against each microbe for 2 weeks. The 3.0 and 4.0% chlorhexidine-incorporated resin cement possessed prolonged chlorhexidine release and antibacterial properties for 2 weeks.

show abstract

Chlorhexidine release from an experimental glass ionomer cement

Cited by 102 publications

References 15 publications

Effect of chlorhexidine gluconate on porosity and compressive strength of a glass ionomer cement

Effect of chlorhexidine gluconate on porosity and compressive strength of a glass ionomer cement

Antibacterial effects of 4‐META/MMA‐TBB resin containing chlorhexidine

Chlorhexidine release and antibacterial properties of chlorhexidine‐incorporated polymethyl methacrylate‐based resin cement

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About