| Literature DB >> 28772841 |
Monika Lukomska-Szymanska1, Magdalena Konieczka2, Beata Zarzycka3, Barbara Lapinska4, Janina Grzegorczyk5, Jerzy Sokolowski6.
Abstract
Literature presents inconsistent results on the antibacterial activity of dentine bonding systems (DBS). Antibacterial activity of adhesive systems depends on several factors, including composition and acidity. Flow cytometry is a novel detection method to measure multiple characteristics of a single cell: total cell number, structural (size, shape), and functional parameters (viability, cell cycle). The LIVE/DEAD® BacLightTM bacterial viability assay was used to evaluate an antibacterial activity of DBS by assessing physical membrane disruption of bacteria mediated by DBS. Ten commercial DBSs: four total-etching (TE), four self-etching (SE) and two selective enamel etching (SEE) were tested. Both total-etching DBS ExciTE F and OptiBond Solo Plus showed comparatively low antibacterial activity against E. faecalis. The lowest activity of all tested TE systems showed Te-Econom Bond. Among SE DBS, G-ænial Bond (92.24% dead cells) followed by Clearfil S3 Bond Plus (88.02%) and Panavia F 2.0 ED Primer II (86.67%) showed the highest antibacterial activity against E. faecalis, which was comparable to isopropranol (positive control). In the present study, self-etching DBS exhibited higher antimicrobial activity than tested total-etching adhesives against E. faecalis.Entities:
Keywords: E. faecalis; antibacterial activity; dental bonding systems; flow cytometry
Year: 2017 PMID: 28772841 PMCID: PMC5458997 DOI: 10.3390/ma10050481
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Materials (Basel) ISSN: 1996-1944 Impact factor: 3.623
Figure 1Flow cytometry analysis of E. faecalis cell-suspension after 60 min incubation with NaCl (a single experiment example). (a) Cells labelled green (SYTO9+); (b) Cells labelled red (PI).
Figure 2Flow cytometry analysis of E. faecalis cell-suspension after 60 min incubation with G-ænial Bond (a single experiment example). (a) Cells labelled green (SYTO9+); (b) Cells labelled red (PI).
Figure 3Image gallery of both: (a) live, labelled green; (b) dead, labelled red and less green cells of E. faecalis.
Antibacterial activity of DBS against E. faecalis-Statistical parameters.
| DBS | Dead Bacterial Cells (%) | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| M | SD | CV | Min.–Max. | ||
| TE | Prime&Bond one Etch&Rinse | 72.04 | 27.47 | 38.13% | 31.80–98.20 |
| Te-Econom Bond | 9.19 | 7.31 | 79.53% | 3.43–21.71 | |
| ExciTE F | 13.76 | 12.26 | 89.11% | 2.29–30.98 | |
| OptiBond Solo Plus | 13.13 | 8.39 | 63.91% | 5.88–28.45 | |
| SE | G-ænial Bond | 92.24 | 3.64 | 3.78% | 90.00–99.92 |
| G-Bond | 60.46 | 35.16 | 58.16% | 21.38–98.74 | |
| Clearfil S3 Bond Plus | 88.02 | 13.70 | 15.57% | 60.20–99.82 | |
| Panavia F 2.0 ED Primer II | 86.67 | 14.20 | 16.39% | 63.48–99.73 | |
| SEE | Prime&Bond® One Select | 30.53 | 18.86 | 61.78% | 4.63–60.23 |
| Futurabond M+ | 28.87 | 15.58 | 53.96% | 7.57–49.23 | |
| Control | Isopropranol 70% | 95.41 | 5.96 | 6.24% | 76.75–99.81 |
| NaCl 0.85% | 6.56 | 7.25 | 110.44% | 1.49–25.00 | |
M–mean; SD–standard deviation; CV–coefficient of variation.
Figure 4Assessment of dead bacterial cells [%] after incubation with all tested DBS.
Levels of statistical significance for post hoc pairwise comparisons of percentages of dead cells, based on Fisher’s protected least-significant difference (LSD).
| DBS | Prime&Bond one Etch&Rinse | Te-Econom Bond | ExciTE F | OptiBond Solo Plus | G-ænial Bond | G-Bond | Clearfil S3 Bond Plus | Panavia F 2.0 ED Primer II | Prime&Bond® One Select | Futura Bond M+ | Isopropanol 70% | NaCl 0.85% |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Prime&Bond one | - | =0.138 | =0.112 | |||||||||
| Te-Econom Bond | - | =0.575 | =0.844 | =0.056 | =0.617 | =0.657 | ||||||
| ExciTE F | =0.575 | - | =0.715 | =0.170 | =0.952 | =0.122 | =0.278 | |||||
| OptiBond Solo Plus | =0.844 | =0.715 | - | 0.085 | =0.761 | =0.058 | =0.503 | |||||
| G-ænial Bond | - | =0.077 | =0.096 | =0.921 | ||||||||
| G-Bond | =0.056 | =0.170 | =0.085 | - | =0.153 | =0.857 | ||||||
| Clearfil S3 Bond Plus | =0.138 | =0.077 | - | =0.913 | =0.052 | |||||||
| Panavia F 2.0 ED Primer II | =0.112 | =0.096 | =0.913 | - | =0.068 | |||||||
| Prime&Bond® One Select | =0.617 | =0.952 | =0.761 | =0.153 | - | =0.109 | =0.309 | |||||
| Futura bond M+ | =0.122 | =0.058 | =0.857 | =0.109 | - | |||||||
| Isopropanol 70% | =0.921 | =0.052 | =0.068 | - | ||||||||
| NaCl 0.85% | =0.657 | =0.278 | =0.503 | =0.309 | - |
Figure 5Assessment of dead bacterial cells [%] after incubation–group comparison of types (TE, SE, SEE) of tested DBS.
Commercial bonding systems used in the study.
| Name | Manufacturer | Number of Components | Type | Resin/Monomer | pH | Mode of Etching | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Total-Etching | Self-Etching | Selective Enamel Etching | ||||||
| Prime&Bond One Etch&Rinse | Dentsply, UK | 1 | 2-step | TCB resin, phosphoric acid modified acrylate resin (PENTA), UDMA, TEGDMA, HEMA | 2.5 * | + | ||
| Te-Econom Bond | Ivoclar Vivadent, Germany | 1 | 2-step | HEMA, di- and mono-methacrylates | 2.6 * | + | ||
| ExciTE® F | Ivoclar Vivadent, Germany | 1 | 2-step | Bis-GMA, HEMA, phosphoric acid acrylate, dimethacrylates | 2.5 * | + | ||
| OptiBond™ Solo Plus | Kerr/USA | 1 | 2-step | Bis-GMA, GPDM, HEMA | 2.2 * | + | ||
| G-ænial® Bond | GC, Japan | 1 | 1-step | 4-MET, phosphoric acid ester monomer | 1.5 [ | + | ||
| G-Bond® | GC, Japan | 1 | 1-step | UDMA | 2.0 [ | + | ||
| Clearfil S3 Bond Plus | Kuraray America, USA | 1 | 1-step | MDP, Bis-GMA, HEMA | 2.3 * | + | ||
| Panavia F 2.0 ED Primer II | Kuraray America, USA | 2 (A + B) | 2-step | 2-Hydroxyethyl methacrylate, 10-methacryloyloxydecyl dihydrogen phosphate | 2.4 [ | + | ||
| Prime&Bond® One Select | Dentsply, UK | 1 | 1- or 2-step | bifunctional acrylate, acidic acrylate, phosphoric acid ester | 1.6 * | + | + | + |
| Futurabond M+ | VOCO, Germany | 1 | 1- or 2-step | Bis-GMA, HEMA | 2.0 [ | + | + | + |
* Information obtained from the manufacturer (safety data sheet).