Limits...
Bacterial adhesion of porphyromonas gingivalis on provisional fixed prosthetic materials.

Zortuk M, Kesim S, Kaya E, Ozbilge H, Kiliç K, Cölgeçen O - Dent Res J (Isfahan) (2010)

Bottom Line: Statistical analysis was performed using ANOVA and Dunnett t-tests.All tested materials were significantly rougher than glass (P < 0.05).Dentalon had the lowest fluorescence intensity among the provisional fixed prosthodontic materials.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Assistant Professor, Department of Prosthetic Dentistry, School of Dentistry, Erciyes University, Kayseri, Turkey.

ABSTRACT

Background: When provisional restorations are worn for long term period, the adhesion of bacteria becomes a primary factor in the development of periodontal diseases. The aims of this study were to evaluate the surface roughness and bacterial adhesion of four different provisional fixed prosthodon-tic materials.

Methods: Ten cylindrical specimens were prepared from bis-acrylic composites (PreVISION CB and Protemp 3 Garant), a light-polymerized composite (Revotek LC), and a polymethyl methacrylate-based (Dentalon) provisional fixed prosthodontic materials. Surface roughness was assessed by profilometry. The bacterial adhesion test was applied using Porphyromonas gingivalis (P. gingivalis) and spectro-fluorometric method. Statistical analysis was performed using ANOVA and Dunnett t-tests.

Results: All tested materials were significantly rougher than glass (P < 0.05). Revotek LC had the greatest fluorescence intensity, PreVISION and Protemp 3 Garant had moderate values and all of them had significantly more bacterial adhesion compared to glass (P < 0.05). Dentalon had the lowest fluorescence intensity among the provisional fixed prosthodontic materials.

Conclusion: The quantity of bacterial adhesion and surface roughness differed among the assessed provisional fixed prosthodontic materials. The light-polymerized provisional material Revotek LC had rougher surface and more bacterial adhesion compared with the others.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus

Scanning electron micrograph shows P. gingivalis adhered to Dentalon
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC3065340&req=5

Figure 3: Scanning electron micrograph shows P. gingivalis adhered to Dentalon

Mentions: SEM images showed P. gingivalis as a coccobacillus-shaped cell with aggregates composed of chains and clusters. The colonization pattern of adhering bacteria was similar on all assessed materials, differing only by the number of adhering organisms. A bacterial monolayer was observed on all surfaces, indicating bacterial adhesion rather than accumulation. Only single bacterium and small aggregates were observed on Dentalon (Figure 3). In contrast, SEM images of aggregates on Revotek LC corroborated the results of the fluorescence analyses, which indicated a high degree of bacterial adhesion, with bacterial clusters formed by chain aggregation. This represents a more de-veloped stage of biofilm formation (Figure 4).


Bacterial adhesion of porphyromonas gingivalis on provisional fixed prosthetic materials.

Zortuk M, Kesim S, Kaya E, Ozbilge H, Kiliç K, Cölgeçen O - Dent Res J (Isfahan) (2010)

Scanning electron micrograph shows P. gingivalis adhered to Dentalon
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC3065340&req=5

Figure 3: Scanning electron micrograph shows P. gingivalis adhered to Dentalon
Mentions: SEM images showed P. gingivalis as a coccobacillus-shaped cell with aggregates composed of chains and clusters. The colonization pattern of adhering bacteria was similar on all assessed materials, differing only by the number of adhering organisms. A bacterial monolayer was observed on all surfaces, indicating bacterial adhesion rather than accumulation. Only single bacterium and small aggregates were observed on Dentalon (Figure 3). In contrast, SEM images of aggregates on Revotek LC corroborated the results of the fluorescence analyses, which indicated a high degree of bacterial adhesion, with bacterial clusters formed by chain aggregation. This represents a more de-veloped stage of biofilm formation (Figure 4).

Bottom Line: Statistical analysis was performed using ANOVA and Dunnett t-tests.All tested materials were significantly rougher than glass (P < 0.05).Dentalon had the lowest fluorescence intensity among the provisional fixed prosthodontic materials.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Assistant Professor, Department of Prosthetic Dentistry, School of Dentistry, Erciyes University, Kayseri, Turkey.

ABSTRACT

Background: When provisional restorations are worn for long term period, the adhesion of bacteria becomes a primary factor in the development of periodontal diseases. The aims of this study were to evaluate the surface roughness and bacterial adhesion of four different provisional fixed prosthodon-tic materials.

Methods: Ten cylindrical specimens were prepared from bis-acrylic composites (PreVISION CB and Protemp 3 Garant), a light-polymerized composite (Revotek LC), and a polymethyl methacrylate-based (Dentalon) provisional fixed prosthodontic materials. Surface roughness was assessed by profilometry. The bacterial adhesion test was applied using Porphyromonas gingivalis (P. gingivalis) and spectro-fluorometric method. Statistical analysis was performed using ANOVA and Dunnett t-tests.

Results: All tested materials were significantly rougher than glass (P < 0.05). Revotek LC had the greatest fluorescence intensity, PreVISION and Protemp 3 Garant had moderate values and all of them had significantly more bacterial adhesion compared to glass (P < 0.05). Dentalon had the lowest fluorescence intensity among the provisional fixed prosthodontic materials.

Conclusion: The quantity of bacterial adhesion and surface roughness differed among the assessed provisional fixed prosthodontic materials. The light-polymerized provisional material Revotek LC had rougher surface and more bacterial adhesion compared with the others.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus