ASSESSMENT OF MICROLEAKAGE AND MICROHARDNESS OF GLASS IONOMER CEMENT CONTAINING PROPOLIS: In Vitro Study

Document Type : Original Article

Authors

1 Pediatric department ,Faculty of Dentistry ,University of Alexandria,Alexandria ,Egypt

2 Professor, Department of Pediatric Dentistry and Dental Public Health, Faculty of Dentistry, Alexandria University, Egypt

3 Bio material Department, Faculty of Dentistry, Alexandria university, Alexandria,Egypt

4 pediatric dental department Alexandria university

Abstract

Introduction: Propolis is a natural product collected by bees. Contemporary dentistry has recently focused on it, due to its antimicrobial properties.
Objectives: To evaluate and compare the microleakage and microhardness of GIC containing EEP at 2 different concentrations to the conventional GIC.
Materials and Methods: Two tests were assessed 1. Microleakage test :where 24 exfoliated primary teeth were divided randomly into three groups according to the restorative material used after standardized class V cavity preparation: (Group1: Conventional GIC, Group2: GIC containing 25% EEP, and Group 3: GIC containing 50% EEP), teeth were immersed in 2% methylene blue solution for 24 hours, sectioned and examined under stereomicroscope. 2. Microhardness test: 8 specimens from each group (GIC, GIC 25% EEP, and GIC 50% EEP) were prepared using a mold of six mm in diameter and two mm in thickness. The hardness of the specimens was measured using Vickers Micro-hardness Tester.
Results: There was no statistically significant difference in the microleakage scores between the three groups (p=0.34).The Microhardness values of the present study showed that GIC with 25% EEP showed significantly higher values than both the conventional GIC and GIC with 50% EEP (p < 0.0001). There was no significant difference in the microhardness between the conventional GIC or GIC with 50% EEP (p>0.05)
Conclusion: The addition of EEP to GIC in either (25%, 50%) did not affect the microleakage of GIC. Addition of 25% EEP increased the microhardness of the GIC while the addition of 50% EEP did not affect the microhardness of GIC

Keywords

Main Subjects

References

  1. Kujumgiev A, Tsvetkova I, Serkedjieva Y, Bankova V, Christov R, Popov S. Antibacterial, antifungal and antiviral activity of propolis of different geographic origin. J Ethnopharmacol. 1999;64:235-40.
  2. Prabhakar AR, Balehosur DV, Basappa N. Comparative evaluation of shear bond strength and fluoride release of conventional glass ionomer with 1% ethanolic extract of propolis incorporated glass ionomer cement –invitro study. J Clin Diagn Res. 2016;10:88-91.
  3. Subramaniam P, Girish Babu KL, Neeraja G, Pillai S. Does addition of propolis to glass ionomer cement alter its physicomechanical properties? An In Vitro Study. J Clin Pediatr Dent. 2017;41:62-5.
  4. Kumazawa S, Hamasaka T, Nakayama T. Antioxidant activity of propolis of various geographic origins. Food Chem. 2004;84:329- 39.
  5. Hayacibara MF, Koo H, Rosalen PL, Duarte S, Franco EM, Bowen WH, et al. In vitro and in vivo effects of isolated fractions of Brazilian propolis on caries development. J Ethnopharmacol. 2005;101:110-5.
  6. Russo A, Cardile V, Sanchez F, Troncoso N, Vanella A, Garbarino JA. Chilean propolis: antioxidant activity and antiproliferative action in human tumor cell lines. Life Sci. 2005;76:545-58.
  7. Bhuvnesh A, Sarkar PA, Tomar U, Bishen KA. Antibacterial effect of propolis derived from tribal region on Streptococcus mutans and Lactobacillus acidophilus: An in vitro study. J Indian Soc Pedod Prev Dent. 2018;36:48-52. 
  8. Vermeersch G, Leloup G, Delmee M, Vreven J. Antibacterial activity of glass-ionomer cements, compomers and resin composites: relationship between acidity and material setting phase. J Oral Rehabil. 2005;32:368-74.
  9. Davidovich E, Weiss E, Fuks AB, Beyth N. Surface antibacterial properties of glass ionomer cements used in atraumatic restorative treatment. J Am Dent Assoc. 2007;138:1347-52.
  10. De Carvalho Machado J, Duque C, Pitzer de Oliveira J, Scarparo A. Effect of storage time and chlorhexidine addition on the mechanical properties of glass ionomer cements. Braz J Oral Sci. 2017;16:1-9.
  11. Altunsoy M, Tanriver M, Turkan U, Uslu ME, Silici S. In vitro evaluation of microleakage and microhardness of ethanolic extracts of propolis in different proportions added to glass ionomer cement. J Clin Pediatr Dent. 2016;40:136-40.
  12. Nursen T, Ozan F, Ozyurt M, Kulekci G. In vitro antibacterial effects of glass-ionomer cement containing ethanolic extract of propolis on Streptococcus mutans. Eur J Dent. 2012;6:428-33.
  13. Erdem H, Ozturk F, Bilenler T, Aksakalli S, Simsek N. Antibacterial and mechanical properties of propolis added to glass ionomer cement. Angle Orthod. 2014;84:368-73.
  14. Koo H, Pearson SK, Scott-Anne K, Abranches J, Cury JA, Rosalen PL, et al. Effects of apigenin and tt-farnesol on glucosyltransferase activity, biofilm viability and caries development in rats. Oral Microbiol Immunol. 2002;17:337-43.
  15. Charan J, Biswas T. How to calculate sample size for different study designs in medical research? Indian J Psychol Med. 2013;35:121-6.
  16. Nandana KL, Sankar AJS, Kumar MGM, Naveen K, Pranitha K, Manjula BS. Comparative evaluation of microleakag using three variables of glass-ionomer cement in primary and permanent teeth: An in vitro study. J Interdiscip Dent. 2016;6:110-5.
  17. Pannucci CJ, Wilkins EG. Identifying and avoiding bias in research. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2010;126:619-25.
  18. Ahluwalia P, Chopra S, Thomas AM. Strength characteristics and marginal sealing ability of chlorhexidine-modified glass ionomer cement: an in vitro study. J Indian Soc Pedod Prev Dent. 2012;30:41-6.
  19. Frencken JE, Holmgren CJ. Atraumatic restorative treatment (ART) for dental caries. Nijmegen: STI Book; 1999.
  20. Muangmingsuk A, Senawongse P, Yudhasaraprasithi S. Influence of different softstart polymerization techniques on marginal adaptation of Class V restorations. Am J Dent. 2003;16:117-9.
  21. Nagaa AA,Yousef M, Ramadan R, Fayez Bahgat S, Alshawwa L. Does the use of a novel self -adhesive flowable composite reduce nanoleakage? Clin Cosmet Investig Dent. 2015;7:55-64.
  22. Hossain M, Yamada Y, Nakamura Y, Murakami Y, Tamaki Y, Matsumoto K. A study on surface roughness and microleakage test in cavities prepared by Er:YAG laser irradiation and etched bur cavities. Lasers Med Sci. 2003;18:25-31.
  23. 23.Troca VB, Fernandes KB, Terrile AE, Marcucci MC, Andrade FB, Wang L. Effect of green propolis addition to physical mechanical properties of glass ionomer cements. J Appl Oral Sci. 2011;19:100–5. 
  24. Muangmingsuk A, Senawongse P, Yudhasaraprasithi S. Influence of different softstart polymerization techniques on marginal adaptation of Class V restorations. Am J Dent. 2003;16:117-9.

Alexandria Dental Journal
Volume 46, Issue 2
C (Pediatric dentistry, Dental public health, Orthodontics)
August 2021
Pages 172-177

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics