The Journal of the American Dental Association
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


J Am Dent Assoc, Vol 138, No 10, 1347-1352.
© 2007 American Dental Association

This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Davidovich, E.
Right arrow Articles by Beyth, N.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Davidovich, E.
Right arrow Articles by Beyth, N.
Related Collections
Right arrow Restoratives

RESEARCH

Surface antibacterial properties of glass ionomer cements used in atraumatic restorative treatment



Esti Davidovich, DMD, MSc, Ervin Weiss, DMD, Anna B. Fuks, DDS and Nurit Beyth, DMD

Background. Atraumatic restorative treatment (ART) is recommended for use worldwide, not only in developing countries where resources are not readily available, but also in more industrialized countries. The antibacterial properties of restorative dental materials may improve the restorative treatment outcome. Glass ionomer cement (GIC) has been advocated as the preferred restoration material for ART. The authors evaluated the antibacterial properties of restorative materials—three GICs and a zinc oxide eugenol (ZOE)—in vitro.

Methods. Streptococcus mutans, Actinomyces viscosus and Enterococcus faecalis were the test microorganisms. The authors used a quantitative microtiter spectrophotometric assay to evaluate the antibacterial effect of the restorative materials using the direct contact test (DCT) of freshly prepared and one-week-aged materials.

Results. The freshly prepared GICs and ZOE showed no bacterial growth in all tested bacteria compared with a control. This effect lasted for at least one week for S. mutans and A. viscosus but not for E. faecalis.

Conclusions. Conventional GICs used in ART showed antibacterial surface properties against cariogenic bacteria for at least one week. Further study on the long-term antimicrobial effects of GICs is needed.

Clinical Implications. The antimicrobial properties of freshly prepared restorative materials and aged restorative materials used in ART have a potent effect against cariogenic bacteria. These properties have crucial importance in preventing secondary caries.

Key Words: Glass ionomers; bacteria; atraumatic restorative treatment

Abbreviations: ART: Atraumatic restorative treatment • BHI: Brain-heart infusion • DCT: Direct contact test • GIC: Glass ionomer cement • PBS: Phosphate-buffered saline • ZOE: Zinc oxide eugenol •




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Journal of the American Dental AssociationHome page
G. J. Christensen
Restorative Dentistry for Times of Economic Distress
J Am Dent Assoc, February 1, 2009; 140(2): 239 - 242.
[Full Text] [PDF]




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright©1995-2007 American Dental Association (ADA).
Reproduction or republication strictly prohibited without prior written permission of ADA.