Effect of fluoride-resistant strains of Streptococcus mutans on the bonding strength of dental resin composite

doi:10.19439/j.sjos.2018.02.004

Abstract

Abstract: PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to determine the influence of fluoride-resistant strains of S. mutans on the bonding strength of dental resin composite. METHODS: Standardized specimens of resin composite (Z350), and self-etch adhesives (Single bond Universal, 3M) were incubated with S. mutans UA159, fluoride-resistant strains of S. mutans UA159 (UA159-FR) or uninoculated culture medium (Control) or PBS for up to 14 days. Resin-dentin bonded disks were subjected to push-out test. Fractured surface analysis of the specimens was performed by scanning electron microscopy(SEM). SPSS18.0 software package was used for statistical analysis. RESULTS: UA159-FR and UA159 were shown to decrease the bond strengths in levels comparable with those found in the control groups (P<0.05). SEM confirmed the increased degradation of all materials with UA159-FR and UA159, compared with control and PBS. CONCLUSIONS: The results suggest that resin-dentin interface can be compromised by oral bacteria that contribute to the progress of secondary caries. Fluoride-resistant strains of S. mutans and its parental strains both decrease bonding strengths in a short time, but no significant difference in the extent of damage.

Key words: Dental resin composite, Fluoride-resistant Streptococcus mutans, Streptococcus mutans, Bond strengths

CLC Number:

R781.3

WANG Jia, HE Zhi-yan, RAN Shu-jun, ZHU Lai-kuan.. Effect of fluoride-resistant strains of Streptococcus mutans on the bonding strength of dental resin composite[J]. Shanghai Journal of Stomatology, 2018, 27(3): 239-243.

References

[1] Beazoglou T, Eklund S, Heffley D, et al. Economic impact of regulating the use of amalgam restorations [J]. Public Health Rep, 2007, 122(5): 657-663.
[2] Spencer P, Ye Q, Misra A, et al. Proteins, pathogens, and failure at the composite-tooth interface [J]. J Dent Res, 2014, 93(12): 1243-1249.
[3] Mj?r IA. Clinical diagnosis of recurrent caries [J]. J Am Dent Assoc, 2005, 136(10): 1426-1433.
[4] Opdam NJ, Bronkhorst EM, Roeters JM, et al. A retrospective clinical study on longevity of posterior composite and amalgam restorations [J]. Dent Mater, 2007, 23(1): 2-8.
[5] Beyth N, Domb AJ, Weiss EI. An in vitro quantitative antibacterial analysis of amalgam and composite resins [J]. J Dent, 2007, 35(3): 201-206
[6] Montanaro L, Campoccia D, Rizzi S, et al. Evaluation of bacterial adhesion of Streptococcus mutans on dental restorative materials [J]. Biomaterials, 2004, 25(18): 4457-4463.
[7] Beyth N, Bahir R, Matalon S, et al. Streptococcus mutans biofilm changes surface-topography of resin composites [J]. Dent Mater, 2008, 24(6): 732-736.
[8] ten Cate JM. Biofilms, a new approach to the microbiology of dental plaque [J]. Odontology, 2006, 94(1): 1-9
[9] 姜葳. 变异链球菌压力耐受机制的研究进展 [J]. 国际口腔医学杂志, 2011, 38(1): 44-47.
[10] 梁景平. 牙菌斑生物膜特性研究进展 [J]. 上海交通大学学报(医学版), 2007, 27(2):123-127.
[11] Deligeorgi V, Mjor IA, Wilson NH. An overview of reasons for the placement and replacement of restorations[J]. Prim Dent Care, 2001, 8(1): 5-11.
[12] De Munck J, Van Landuyt K, Peumans M, et al. A critical review of the durability of adhesion to tooth tissue: methods and results[J]. J Dent Res, 2005, 84(2): 118-132.
[13] Koshiro K, Inoue S, Sano H, et al. In vivo degradation of resin-dentin bonds produced by a self-etch and an etch-and-rinse adhesive [J]. Eur J Oral Sci, 2005, 113(4): 341-348.
[14] Caixeta RV, Guiraldo RD, Kaneshima EN, et al. Push-out bond strength of restorations with bulk-fill, flow, and conventional resin composites [J]. Sci World J, 2015, 2015: 452976.
[15] Li Y, Carrera C, Chen R, et al. Degradation in the dentin-composite interface subjected to multi-species biofilm challenges [J]. Acta Biomater, 2014, 10(1): 375-383.
[16] Segreto D, Brandt WC, Correr-Sobrinho L, et al. Influence of irradiance on the push-out bond strength of composite restorations photoactivated by LED[J]. J Contemp Dent Pract, 2008, 9(2): 89-96.
[17] 孙喆, 梁景平, 张岚. 声波器械去除根管玷污层能力的比较研究 [J]. 牙体牙髓牙周病学杂志, 2005, 15(7): 382-386.
[18] McBain AJ. Chapter 4: In vitro biofilm models: an overview [J]. Adv Appl Microbiol, 2009, 69: 99-132.
[19] Ferracane JL. Models of caries formation around dental composite restorations [J]. J Dent Res, 2017, 96(4): 364-371.
[20] Bourbia M, Ma D, Cvitkovitch DG, et al. Cariogenic bacteria degrade dental resin composites and adhesives [J]. J Dent Res, 2013, 92(11): 989-994.
[21] 盛江筠, 刘正. 变形链球菌耐氟菌株的诱导及产酸性的实验研究 [J]. 中华口腔医学杂志, 2000, 35(2): 95-98.
[22] Lenzi TL, Calvo AF, Tedesco TK, et al. Effect of method of caries induction on aged resin-dentin bond of primary teeth [J]. BMC Oral Health, 2015, 15: 79.
[23] 许华, 刘英群. 变异链球菌耐氟菌株的致龋能力 [J]. 国际口腔医学杂志, 2013, 40(5): 698-700.
[24] Zhang N, Ma YS, Weir MD, et al. Current Insights into the modulation of oral bacterial degradation of dental polymeric restorative materials [J]. Materials (Basel), 2017, 10(5): E507.