| Literature DB >> 36013786 |
Lavanya Anumula1, Sindhu Ramesh2, Venkata Suneel Kumar Kolaparthi3, Richard Kirubakaran4, Mohmed Isaqali Karobari2,5,6, Suraj Arora7, Ahmed A Saleh7, Omir Aldowah8, Pietro Messina9, Giuseppe Alessandro Scardina9.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The role of endogenous Matrix Metallo Proteinases in resin dentin bond deterioration over time has been well documented. The present study aimed to systematically review the literature; in vitro and ex vivo studies that assessed the outcomes of natural cross-linkers for immediate and long-term tensile bond strength were included.Entities:
Keywords: Grape seed extract; flavonoids; matrix metalloproteinase; matrix metalloproteinase inhibitors; plant extract
Year: 2022 PMID: 36013786 PMCID: PMC9413318 DOI: 10.3390/ma15165650
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Materials (Basel) ISSN: 1996-1944 Impact factor: 3.748
Figure 1Flow diagram of study selection according to PRISMA statement.
The 5 cross linkers and their concentrations assessed in this systematic review.
| Sl No. | Cross Linker | Concentration | References |
|---|---|---|---|
|
| GSE/PA | 6.5% | [ |
|
| CSE | 6.5% | [ |
|
| GTE | 2% | [ |
|
| EGCG | 2% | [ |
|
| Baicalein | 2.5 μg/mL | [ |
(GSE/PA—Grape seed extract/Proanthocyanidin; CSE—Cocoa seed extract; GTE—Green tea extract; EGCG—Epigallocatechin Gallate).
Figure 2Forest plot analysis of studies at baseline (No ageing). (A)—Proanthocyanidin (PA)/Grape seed extract (GSE) vs. control at baseline. (B)—Cocoa seed extract (CSE) vs. control at baseline. (C)—Green tea extract (GTE) vs. control at baseline. (D)—Epigallocatechin gallate (EGCG) vs. control at baseline. (E)—Baicalein vs. control at baseline.
Figure 3Forest plot analysis of studies with 6–9 months of ageing (<1 year).
Figure 4Forest plot analysis of studies with 12 months of ageing (>1 year).
The characteristics of in vitro studies included.
| Author | Year | Natural MMP Inhibitors Studied | Adhesive Used | Other Test Materials Tested | Soaking Period | Tested Interval (Aging) | Primary Outcome | Secondary | Included in Meta Analysis |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Al Ammar [ | 2009 | 6.5% Grape seed extract in PBS | Acetone and Ethanol based | 0.5% Genipin | 1 h | 24 h | Micro tensile bond strength (μ TBS) | Fracture pattern | No |
| Castellan [ | 2010 | 6.5% Grape seed extract (distilled water) | Acetone and Ethanol based | 60 min | 24 h | μ TBS | Modulus of elasticity | No | |
| Epasinghe [ | 2012 | Proanthcynidine in adhesive at 1%,2% and 3% | Ethanol based | 30 s | 24 h | μ TBS | Failure modes and | No | |
| Castellan [ | 2013 | 6.5% Grape Seed extract (distilled water) | Acetone and Ethanol based | 10 min | 24 h | μ TBS | Yes | ||
| Monteiro [ | 2013 | Green tea extract 1.1% | Ethanol based | CHX | 60 s | 24 h | μ TBS | Failure modes | Yes |
| Zheng [ | 2015 | Green tea extract 0.05% | Ethanol based (Total etch) | CHX | 60 s | 9 months | μ TBS | failure modes | Yes |
| Gajjela [ | 2016 | 6.5% Grape seed extract (distilled water) | Self etch | Riboflavin/Chitosan | 10 min | Not mentioned | μ TBS | No | |
| Hass [ | 2016 | 6.5% PA | Ethanol based | UVA Riboflavin | 60 s | 24 h | μ TBS | failure modes | Yes |
| Neri JR [ | 2016 | 0.1% EGCG | Self etch | CHX 2% | 60 s | 24 h | μ TBS | failure modes | Yes |
| Gerhardt [ | 2016 | Green tea extract 2% | Self etch | CHX 2% | 60 s | 24 h | μ TBS | failure modes | Yes |
| Venigella [ | 2016 | 6.5% PA | Ethanol based | Riboflavin | 2 min | 24 h | μ TBS | failure modes | Yes |
| Zheng [ | 2017 | 5% PA | Total etch | Chlorhexidine | 30 s | 24 h | μ TBS | Immunolabeling of MMPs | No |
| J Li [ | 2018 | 2.5 μg/mL | Ethanol based | 5% GD | 2 min | Immediate | μ TBS | Degree of conversion, | No |
| Poyi chu [ | 2019 | Baicalein | Ethanol based | 2 min | Immediately | μ TBS | Cell viability assay, | No |
Risk of bias of studies considering characteristics reported in the material and methods section.
| Sl No. | Study | Teeth Randomization | Teeth Free of Caries | Specimens with Similar Dimensions | Materials Used According to Manufacture Instructions | Sample Size Calculation | Blinding of the Operator of the Testing Machine | Sample Preparation and Handling | Application of Test Material | Specimen Test According to Standard Specifications | Risk of Bias |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| CASTELLAN 2013 [ | N | Y | Y | Y | N | N | Y | y | Y | medium |
|
| HASS 2016 [ | Y | Y | Y | N | N | N | Y | Y | Y | medium |
|
| VENIGELLA 2016 [ | Y | Y | Y | N | N | N | Y | y | Y | medium |
|
| GERHARDT 2016 [ | Y | Y | Y | Y | N | N | Y | Y | Y | Low |
|
| MONTEIRO 2013 [ | Y | Y | Y | Y | N | N | Y | Y | Y | Low |
|
| ZHENG 2014 [ | Y | Y | Y | Y | N | N | Y | Y | Y | Low |
|
| NERI JR 2016 [ | Y | Y | Y | Y | N | N | Y | Y | Y | Low |
Articles that reported one to four items—High risk of bias, Five to six items—Medium risk of bias, Seven to nine items—Low risk of bias.