The Journal of Contemporary Dental Practice

Register      Login

SEARCH WITHIN CONTENT

FIND ARTICLE

Volume / Issue

Online First

Archive
Related articles

VOLUME 14 , ISSUE 3 ( May-June, 2013 ) > List of Articles

RESEARCH ARTICLE

Comparison of Antibacterial Activity of Glass-ionomer Cement and Amalgam in Class Two Restorations by Streptococcus mutans Count Analysis at Fixed Intervals: An in vivo Study

Veeresh S Tegginmani, Beenarani Goel, Virendra Uppin, LS Vijay Kumar, Abhinav Nainani

Citation Information : Tegginmani VS, Goel B, Uppin V, Kumar LV, Nainani A. Comparison of Antibacterial Activity of Glass-ionomer Cement and Amalgam in Class Two Restorations by Streptococcus mutans Count Analysis at Fixed Intervals: An in vivo Study. J Contemp Dent Pract 2013; 14 (3):381-386.

DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10024-1332

Published Online: 01-06-2013

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2013; Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) Ltd.


Abstract

Aim

The purpose of the present study was to determine the influence of glass ionomer cement and amalgam restoration on the level of Streptococcus mutans in the interproximal plaque at periodic intervals and also to compare these values.

Materials and methods

Seventeen adult patients having two proximal carious lesions on any quadrant of the jaw (either opposing or contralateral) were selected for this study. Carious lesions were diagnosed clinically and from bitewing radiographs. Of the two carious lesions, one was restored with glass ionomer cermet cement and another with amalgam. Plaque samples were collected from interproximal areas before and at 1 month and 3 months post-treatment in a test tube containing 5 ml of modified Stuart's liquid transport fluid. Identification of organisms in the colony was done after Gram staining.

Results

Comparison of values before restoration and after restoration at 1 month interval showed a statistically significant decrease (p < 0.001). Similarly, comparison of values before and after restorations at 3 months also showed statistically significant decrease (p < 0.02). But comparison of restorations of 1 and 3 months intervals showed no statistical significant difference (p > 0.05).

Conclusion

Glass ionomer restorations have definite advantage over the amalgam, as the tunnel preparation is more conservative and fluoride release from the glass ionomer inhibits the growth of S. mutans in the plaque.

Clinical significance

Glass ionomer cement should be preferred over amalgam in conservatively prepared restorations as it reduces the microbial activities due to fluoride release.

How to cite this article

Tegginmani VS, Goel B, Uppin V, Horatti P, Kumar LSV, Nainani A. Comparison of Antibacterial Activity of Glass-ionomer Cement and Amalgam in Class Two Restorations by Streptococcus mutans Count Analysis at Fixed Intervals: An in vivo Study. J Contemp Dent Pract 2013;14(3):381-386.


PDF Share
  1. Glass cermet cements. Quint Int 1985;16:333-343.
  2. The release of fluoride and other chemical species from a glass ionomer cement. Biomaterials 1985;6:431-433.
  3. A review of systemic and topical fluorides for the prevention of dental caries. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol 1973;1(3):104-114.
  4. Evaluation of a combination of selfadministered fluoride procedures for the control of dental caries in a nonfluoride area: findings after 4 years. J Am Dent Assoc 1979 Feb;98(2):219-223.
  5. A mechanism for the anticaries action of fluoride. Caries Res 1980;14:298-303.
  6. Cavity sealing ability of composite and glass ionomer cement restorations. An assessment in vitro. Br Dent J 1978;144:139-142.
  7. Experimental secondary caries around amalgam, composite and glass ionomer cement fillings in human teeth. SSO Schweiz Monatsschr Zahnheilkd 1979;89(9):965-986.
  8. Secondary caries formation in vitro around glass ionomer restorations. Quintessence Int 1986;17:527-532.
  9. Glass ionomer cements as a fluoride release system in vivo. Swed Dent J 1990;14:267-273.
  10. Class II glass ionomer/silver cermet restorations and their effect on interproximal plaque growth of mutans streptococci. Ped Dent 1990;12:20-23.
  11. The in vivo effect of glucose solutions containing Cu++ and Zn++ on the acidogenicity of dental plaque. Acta Odontal Scand 1980;38:229-233.
  12. Accumulation of Cu and Zn in human dental plaque in vivo. Caries Res 1983;17:310-314.
  13. Some aspects of the dynamics Cu and Zn retained in plaque as related to their effect on plaque pH. Scand J Dent Res 1983;91:169-174.
  14. The effect of fluoride salt of copper, silver and tin on the acidogenicity of dental plaque in vivo. Scand J Dent Res 1980;88:476-480.
  15. Susceptibility of oral bacteria to various fluoride salts. J Dent Res 1982 Jun;61(6):786-790.
  16. Streptococcus mutans in plaque from conventional and from non-gamma-2 amalgam restoration. Scand J Dent Res 1987;95:266-269.
  17. Comparison of antibacterial activity of three fluoride– and zinc releasing commercial glass ionomer cements on strains of mutans streptococci: An in vitro study. J Indian Soc Pedod Prevent Dent 2008;26 Suppl 2:S56-S61.
  18. Copper in approximal plaque from conventional and non-gamma-2 amalgam restoration. Acta Odontal Scand 1992;50:79-82.
  19. An in vivo study on the release of fluoride from glass ionomer cement. Quintessence Int 1991;22:221-224.
  20. Effect of fluoride varnish on Streptococcus mutans counts in plaque of caries free children using Dentocult SM strip mutans test: a randomized controlled triple blind study. J Indian Soc Pedod Prevent Dent 2007 Oct-Dec;25(4):157-163.
  21. A comparative study of fluoride release from glass ionomer cement. Quintessence Int 1991;22:215-219.
  22. Inhibition of microbial adherence and growth by various glass ionomer in vitro. Dent Mater 1992 Jan;8(1):16-20.
  23. Fluoride release from fluoride-containing liners/bases. Quintessence Int 1990;21(1):41-45.
  24. Mutans streptococci in interproximal plaque from amalgam and glass ionomer restorations. Car Res 1990;24:133-136.
  25. Effect of sucrose rinse on bacterial colonization on amalgam and composite. Acta Odontal Scand 1982;40:193-196.
  26. Fluoride in dental plaque and its effects. J Dent Res 1990 Feb; 69 Spec No:645-652; discussion 682-683.
  27. Short-and long-term fluoride release from glass ionomers and other fluoride-containing filling materials in vitro. Scand J Dent Res 1990;98:179-185.
  28. Antibacterial activity of glass ionomer restorative cements and polyacid modified composite resin against cariogenic bacteria. Indian J Med Microbiol 2006;24:150-151.
  29. Fluoride release from a new glass ionomer cement. Operat Dent 2011;36:80-85.
  30. Glass ionomer cements in pediatric dentistry: review of the literature. Pediatric Dentistry. 2002;24(5):423-429.
  31. In vitro and in vivo investigation of the biological and mechanical behaviour of resin-modified glass ionomer cement containing chlorhexidine. J Dent 2013 Feb;41(2):155-163.
PDF Share
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.