Surface Roughness and Streptococcus mutans Adhesion on Metallic and Ceramic Fixed Prosthodontic Materials after Scaling

Abstract

The aim of this study was to evaluate the surface roughness of fixed prosthodontic materials after polishing or roughening with a stainless steel curette or ultrasonic scaler and to examine the effect of these on Streptococcus mutans adhesion and biofilm accumulation. Thirty specimens (10 × 10 × 3 mm3) of zirconia (Zr), pressed lithium disilicate (LDS-Press), milled lithium disilicate glazed (LDS-Glaze), titanium grade V (Ti) and cobalt-chromium (CoCr) were divided into three groups (n = 10) according to surface treatment: polished (C), roughened with stainless steel curette (SC), roughened with ultrasonic scaler (US). Surface roughness values (Sa, Sq) were measured with a spinning disc confocal microscope, and contact angles and surface free energy (SFE) were measured with a contact angle meter. The specimens were covered with sterilized human saliva and immersed into Streptococcus mutans suspensions for bacterial adhesion. The biofilm was allowed to form for 24 h. Sa values were in the range of 0.008−0.139 µm depending on the material and surface treatment. Curette and ultrasonic scaling increased the surface roughness in LDS-Glaze (p < 0.05), Ti (p < 0.01) and CoCr (p < 0.001), however, surface roughness did not affect bacterial adhesion. Zr C and US had a higher bacterial adhesion percentage compared to LDS-Glaze C and US (p = 0.03). There were no differences between study materials in terms of biofilm accumulation.

Study on the surface properties of different commercially available CAD/CAM materials for implant‐supported restorations

“…In one of the studies similar results were acquired, showing significantly lower WCA mean value of feldspathic ceramic, compared to Co–Ni–Cr alloy and PMMA, describing all of them as hydrophilic materials 16 . In addition, zirconia and RBC could be considered as hydrophilic and CoCr alloy as barely hydrophobic material 17,18 . Another study revealed significantly higher WCA value of PEEK, which was approximately 90°, as in our research, compared to yttrium‐stabilized tetragonal zirconia (Y‐TZP).…”

“…16 In addition, zirconia and RBC could be considered as hydrophilic and CoCr alloy as barely hydrophobic material. 17,18 Another study revealed significantly higher WCA value of PEEK, which was approximately 90 , as in our research, compared to yttrium-stabilized tetragonal zirconia (Y-TZP). However, Y-TZP revealed significantly lower SR value than PEEK, opposite to results from the present study.…”

“…No analysis has been yet performed focusing on surface quality of all mentioned CAD/CAM materials. However, numerous authors investigated and compared surface characteristics of conventionally produced materials, [11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18][19][20][21][22] confirming the statement that the surface characteristics of any dental restoration, such as surface roughness [23][24][25][26][27] and contact angle [28][29][30][31][32][33] are extremely important, as they influence microbial adhesion, biocompatibility, wear, corrosion behavior and esthetics. It is evidently that finishing and polishing procedure is of crucial role when fabricating dental restorations.…”

Dual-Functional Polyetheretherketone Surface with an Enhanced Osteogenic Capability and an Antibacterial Adhesion Property In Vitro by Chitosan Modification

“…The first is linked to chitosan’s amino groups, which can be protonated and permeabilize the negatively charged cell membrane, resulting in the destruction and lysis of the internal contents. , Two other coordinated methods are metal chelation and cytoplasmic DNA/mRNA complexation, which decrease intracellular enzyme activity and thus the level of protein synthesis . Even though material roughness is thought to be a critical element in the production of biofilms, when the Ra value is <0.2 μm, the roughness does not affect bacterial adhesion. , Thus, the rougher PEEK-CS will not exhibit increased initial bacterial adhesion. A plaque biofilm, which begins with the initial bacterial adhesion, initiates oral infection.…”

Effect of surface properties of ceramic materials on bacterial adhesion: A systematic review

“…However, the surface free energy of certain substrates can be changed when in the presence of saliva. According to Hjerppe et al, 54 highly polished lithium disilicate (LDS‐Press) specimens with higher surface free energy values had a similar percentage of bacterial adhesion as Zr, CoCr, and Ti, which are hydrophobic, have higher contact angles, and should theoretically have a lower bacterial adhesion rate. The authors correlated these findings with the ability of the human saliva film to reduce the chemical charge of the surfaces and transform the surface to a more hydrophilic pattern.…”