The Journal of Contemporary Dental Practice

Register      Login

SEARCH WITHIN CONTENT

FIND ARTICLE

Volume / Issue

Online First

Archive
Related articles

VOLUME 23 , ISSUE 8 ( August, 2022 ) > List of Articles

ORIGINAL RESEARCH

Quantitative Microbial Leakage Evaluation of Restorative Materials with/without Antibacterial Primer as an Intracoronal Barrier: An Ex Vivo Study

Ambalavanan Parthasarathy, Janarthan Thangadurai, Kavita Raj, Konsam Bidya Devi, Sahana Maben, Mirza Muzaamill Baig

Keywords : Antibacterial, Clearfil, Intracoronal orifice barrier, Microleakage, Primer

Citation Information : Parthasarathy A, Thangadurai J, Raj K, Devi KB, Maben S, Baig MM. Quantitative Microbial Leakage Evaluation of Restorative Materials with/without Antibacterial Primer as an Intracoronal Barrier: An Ex Vivo Study. J Contemp Dent Pract 2022; 23 (8):813-818.

DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10024-3357

License: CC BY-NC 4.0

Published Online: 29-11-2022

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2022; The Author(s).


Abstract

Aim: Aim of this research was to assess the microbial leakage of restorative materials with/without antibacterial primer as an intracoronal barrier. Materials and methods: Fifty-five extracted single-rooted teeth were included in this study. The canals were cleaned, shaped, and obturated with gutta-percha and AH plus sealer at the established working length. After removing 2 mm of coronal gutta-percha, the teeth were incubated for 24 hours. The teeth were divided into groups according to the materials used as intracoronary orifice barriers as follows: • Group I: Clearfil Protect Bond/Clearfil AP-X • Group II: Xeno IV/Clearfil AP-X • Group III: Chemflex (glass ionomer) • Group IV: Positive control (no barrier) • Group V: Negative control (no barrier and inoculated with sterile broth) Sterile 2 chambers bacterial technique was used to assess the microleakage and Enterococcus faecalis was considered as a microbial marker. The percentage of samples leaked, the time taken for leakage, and the number of colony-forming units (CFUs) in the leaked samples were calculated and analyzed statistically. Results: There was no statistically significant difference found in bacterial penetration among the three investigated materials after 120 days of use as an intracoronal orifice barrier. This study can also infer that the leaked sample from the Clearfil Protect Bond showed the least mean number of CFUs (43 CFUs) followed by Xeno IV (61 CFUs) and glass ionomer cement (GIC) (63 CFUs). Conclusion: This study concluded that all three experimental antibacterial primers performed better as intracoronal barrier. However, Clearfil Protect Bond with an antibacterial primer showed promising results as an intracoronal orifice barrier in reducing the number of bacterial leakages. Clinical significance: The significance of intracoronal orifice barriers in the success of endodontic treatment depends on the ability of the materials to prevent microleakage. This helps clinicians to provide successful antibacterial therapy against endodontic anaerobes.


PDF Share
  1. Lin LM, Skribner JE, Gaengler P. Factors associated with endodontic treatment failures. J Endod 1992;18(12):625–627. DOI: 10.1016/S0099-2399(06)81335-X.
  2. Parekh B, Irani R, Sathe S, et al. Intraorifice sealing ability of different materials in endodontically treated teeth: An in vitro study. J Conserv Dent 2014;17(3):234–237. DOI: 10.4103/0972-0707.131783.
  3. Roghanizad N, Jones JJ. Evaluation of coronal microleakage after endodontic treatment. J Endod 1996;22(9):471–473. DOI: 10.1016/S0099-2399(96)80080-X.
  4. Schwartz RS, Fransman R. Adhesive dentistry and endodontics: Materials, clinical strategies and procedures for restoration of access cavities – A review. J Endod 2005;31(3):151–165. DOI: 10.1097/01.don.0000155222.49442.a1.
  5. Yavari HR, Samiei M, Shahi S, et al. Microleakage comparison of four dental materials as intra-orifice barriers in endodontically treated teeth. Iran Endod J 2012;7(1):25–30. PMID: 23060910.
  6. Esteki P, Jahromi MZ, Tahmourespour A. In vitro antimicrobial activity of mineral trioxide aggregate, Biodentine, and calcium-enriched mixture cement against Enterococcus faecalis, Streptococcus mutans, and Candida albicans using the agar diffusion technique. Dent Res J (Isfahan) 2021;18:3. PMID: 34084290.
  7. Cobanoglu N, Alptekin T, Kitagawa H, et al. Evaluation of human pulp tissue response following direct pulp capping with a self-etching adhesive system containing MDPB. Dent Mater J 2021;40(3):689–996. DOI: 10.4012/dmj.2020-145.
  8. Izutani N, Imazato S, Noiri Y, et al. Antibacterial effects of MDPB against anaerobes associated with endodontic infections. Int Endod J 2010;43(8):637–645. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2591.2010.01716.x.
  9. Pisano DM, DiFiore PM, McClanahan SB, et al. Intraorifice sealing of gutta-percha obturated root canals to prevent coronal microleakage. J Endod 1998;24:659–662. DOI:10.1016/S0099-2399(98)80150-7.
  10. Celik EU, Yapar AGD, Ateş M, et al. Bacterial microleakage of barrier materials in obturated root canals. J Endod 2006;32(11):1074–1076. DOI: 10.1016/j.joen.2006.05.011.
  11. Jafari F, Jafari S. Importance and methodologies of endodontic microleakage studies: A systematic review. J Clin Exp Dent 2017;9(6):e812–e819. DOI: 10.4317/jced.53604.
  12. Siqueira JF. Aetiology of root canal treatment failure: Why well-treated teeth can fail. Int Endod J 2001;34:1–10. DOI: 10.1046/j.1365-2591.2001.00396.x.
  13. Khayat A, Lee SJ, Torabinejad M. Human saliva penetration of coronally unsealed obturated root canals. J Endod 1993;19:458–461. DOI: 10.1016/S0099-2399(06)80533-9.
  14. Cardoso MV, de Almeida Neves A, Mine A, et al. Current aspects on bonding effectiveness and stability in adhesive dentistry. Aust Dent J 2011;56(Suppl 1):31–44. DOI: 10.1111/j.1834-7819.2011.01294.x.
  15. Santos JN, de Oliveira Carrilho MR, de Goes MF, et al. Effect of chemical irrigants on the bond strength of a self-etching adhesive to pulp chamber dentin. J Endod 2006;32(11):1088–1090. DOI: 10.1016/j.joen.2006.07.001.
  16. Hayashi M, Takahashi Y, Hirai M, et al. Effect of endodontic irrigation on bonding of resin cement to radicular dentin. Eur J Oral Sci 2005;113(1):70–76. DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-0722.2004.00186.x.
  17. van Landuyt KL, de Munck J, Snauwaert J, et al. Monomer–solvent phase separation in one-step self-etch adhesives. J Dent Res 2005;84:183–188. DOI: 10.1177/154405910508400214.
  18. Imazato S, Torii M, Tsuchitani Y, et al. Incorporation of bacterial inhibitor into resin composite. J Dent Res 1994;73(8):1437–1443. DOI: 10.1177/00220345940730080701.
  19. Izutani N, Imazato S, Nakajo K, et al. Effects of the antibacterial monomer 12-methacryloyloxydodecylpyridinium bromide (MDPB) on bacterial viability and metabolism. Eur J Oral Sci 2011;119(2):175–181. DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-0722.2011.00817.x.
  20. Gondim JO, Duque C, Hebling J, et al. Influence of human dentine on the antibacterial activity of self-etching adhesive systems against cariogenic bacteria. J Dent 2008;36(4):241–248. DOI: 10.1016/j.jdent.2007.12.007.
PDF Share
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.