Journal of Conservative Dentistry
Home About us Editorial Board Instructions Submission Subscribe Advertise Contact e-Alerts Login 
Users Online: 3040
Print this page  Email this page Bookmark this page Small font sizeDefault font sizeIncrease font size
 


 
Table of Contents   
ORIGINAL ARTICLE  
Year : 2022  |  Volume : 25  |  Issue : 4  |  Page : 440-443
Comparative evaluation of eighth-generation bonding agent modified with 7% arginine and 0.12% chitosan for antibacterial property and microtensile bond strength


Department of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, Dr. D Y Patil Dental College and Hospital, Dr. DY Patil Vidyapeeth, Pune, Maharashtra, India

Click here for correspondence address and email

Date of Submission04-Apr-2022
Date of Decision11-May-2022
Date of Acceptance17-May-2022
Date of Web Publication02-Aug-2022
 

   Abstract 

Aim: The aim of this study was to evaluate and compare eighth-generation bonding agent (G-Premio BOND) modified with 7% arginine and 0.12% chitosan for antibacterial property and microtensile bond strength.
Methods: To evaluate antibacterial property, the sterile 96-microtiter plate was taken. The sidewalls of nine wells were coated with 15 μl of adhesive from each group. Suspension of Streptococcus mutans bacteria was placed on each group of adhesive and antibacterial property was checked using Spectrophotometer. Thirty-three healthy extracted premolars were taken and adhesive from each group was applied on the exposed surface of dentin, and the specimens were tested using a universal testing machine at crosshead speed of 1 mm/min.
Results: The least antibacterial efficacy was seen with unmodified eighth-generation bonding agent. This result was statistically significant when all study groups were compared. Microtensile bond strength was evaluated and the highest mean value (5.07) was seen with adhesive modified with 7% arginine, followed by adhesive modified with 0.12% chitosan (mean value: 4.14), and unmodified adhesive had the lowest mean bond strength value (4.07).
Conclusions: The eighth-generation bonding agent modified with 7% arginine and 0.12% chitosan showed antibacterial efficacy against S. mutans. In addition to this, they also had higher tensile bond strength values as compared to unmodified adhesive.

Keywords: Adhesive; antibacterial property; arginine; chitosan; microtensile bond strength

How to cite this article:
Desai HR, Mulay SA, Shinde RR, Shetty PK, Shetty SS. Comparative evaluation of eighth-generation bonding agent modified with 7% arginine and 0.12% chitosan for antibacterial property and microtensile bond strength. J Conserv Dent 2022;25:440-3

How to cite this URL:
Desai HR, Mulay SA, Shinde RR, Shetty PK, Shetty SS. Comparative evaluation of eighth-generation bonding agent modified with 7% arginine and 0.12% chitosan for antibacterial property and microtensile bond strength. J Conserv Dent [serial online] 2022 [cited 2022 Aug 12];25:440-3. Available from: https://www.jcd.org.in/text.asp?2022/25/4/440/353139

   Introduction Top


Dental caries is a global disease. There are various materials used for restoration of cavities such as dental amalgam, GIC, RMGIC, and composite resins. Secondary caries remains one of the main reasons for failure of dental composite restorations, and replacement of the failed restorations accounts for up to 75% of the operative work.[1]

Adhesive resins are designed to provide strong coupling between resin composites and enamel and dentin. In light of minimal-invasive dentistry, this new approach promotes a more conservative cavity design, which relies on the effectiveness of current enamel-dentine adhesives.[2]

In 2010, America introduced VOCO Futurabond DC as eighth-generation bonding agent, which contains nanosized fillers. In the new agents, the addition of nano-fillers with an average particle size of 12 nm increases the penetration of resin monomers and the hybrid layer thickness, which in turn improves the mechanical properties of the bonding systems.[3]

The inherent biodegradation of the interface between the tooth and the adhesive layer produces crevices that are readily colonized by caries pathogens such as Streptococcus mutans. Those crevices are also derived from polymerization shrinkage and improper resin-based composite layering. Although it is unlikely that biofilms can be eliminated from the crevices, the engineering of novel dentin adhesives that can shift the microbial ecology from a disease to a health state is greatly desirable. Addition of composite resin with antibacterial agents like chlorhexidine (CHX) has been documented in literature.[1]

This study attempts to modify the adhesive with arginine and chitosan and evaluate the antibacterial property against S. mutans. The addition of arginine and chitosan may alter the adhesive properties like bond strength of composite resin to tooth substrate. Hence, this research also attempts to evaluate the antibacterial properties of modified adhesive and microtensile bond strength of composite resin using eighth-generation bonding agent with or without modification with 7% arginine and 0.12% chitosan.


   Methods Top


Study groups were as follows:

  • Group I – Eighth-generation bonding agent


    • Group IA – Antibacterial property of adhesive (n = 9)
    • Group IB – Microtensile bond strength of adhesive (n = 11)


  • Group II – Eighth-generation bonding agent modified with 7% arginine


    • Group IIA – Antibacterial property of modified adhesive (n = 9)
    • Group IIB – Microtensile bond strength of modified adhesive (n = 11)


  • Group III – Eighth-generation bonding agent modified with 0.12% chitosan


    • Group IIIA – Antibacterial property of modified adhesive (n = 9)
    • Group IIIB – Microtensile bond strength of modified adhesive (n = 11).


Adhesive formulation

  1. G-Premio BOND (eighth-generation adhesive) was taken; this was considered the control group (Group I)
  2. Arginine-modified adhesive (Group II)


    • 7% of L-arginine was added to the adhesive
    • Experimental adhesive was prepared in a dark room under controlled temperature and humidity


  3. Chitosan-modified adhesive (Group III)


    • 0.12% (w/w) of chitosan was added to adhesive
    • Chitosan solution was prepared by dissolving chitosan powder in 1% (v/v) acetic acid as per the formula 1% = 1 g/10 ml.


To evaluate antibacterial property [Figure 1]
Figure 1: Evaluation of antibacterial property: (a) Microtiter plate with study samples, (b) Wells coated with adhesive, (c) Light curing, (d and e) suspension of Streptococcus mutans bacteria placed on adhesive, (f) Testing of antibacterial property using spectrophotometer

Click here to view


  1. S. mutans was obtained from the Department of Microbiology, Dr. D Y Patil Medical College and Hospital, Pimpri
  2. S. mutans was obtained aerobically from frozen stock cultures in brain–infusion broth containing 8 μg/ml of bacitracin for 48 h at 37°C before use
  3. Antibacterial property was evaluated by using direct contact test (DCT)
  4. The sterile 96-microtiter plate was held vertically, and the sidewalls of nine wells were coated with 15 μl of each adhesive (Group IA, Group IIA, and Group IIIA) without it flowing and wetting the bottom of the well
  5. The experimental adhesive was light cured for 10 s using LED-curing device
  6. The experimental adhesive in each well was light cured at the same distance from the light-curing device and without exposing the adjacent wells
  7. A 10-μl suspension containing S. mutans bacteria and 235 μl of bacitracin was placed on the material, and the plates were incubated in vertical position for 1 h 100 at 37°C
  8. The control consisting of one set of nine wells coated with unmodified adhesive (Group IA) containing equal volume of uninoculated fresh medium was taken
  9. Absorbance at 650 nm (A650) was determined in each well by spectrophotometer set at 37°C to determine the maximum change in A650.


To evaluate microtensile bond strength

Inclusion criteria

  1. Healthy premolars (maxillary and mandibular), which are indicated for extraction due to orthodontic treatment or periodontal condition
  2. Single-rooted premolar.


Exclusion criteria

  1. Carious teeth
  2. Teeth with enamel or dentinal cracks
  3. Hypoplastic teeth
  4. Teeth with occlusal facets
  5. Restored teeth
  6. Teeth with abrasion, attrition, erosion, and abfraction
  7. Fractured teeth.


Thirty-three healthy extracted premolars (as per inclusion criteria) were taken; each tooth was sectioned horizontally to exposed dentin.

Two consecutive coats of the adhesive (control/experimental) were applied on the dentin surface of the premolars by using a disposable brush, which was air-dried for 5 s and light cured for 10 s.

Following adhesive application, 4-mm thickness of composite resin was built up and light cured for 40 s.

After that, the specimens were stored in distilled water at 37°C, 100% humidity for 24 h before sectioning.

After 24 h storage in distilled water at 37°C, the bonded teeth were vertically sectioned into serial slabs and further into beams with cross-sectional area of 1 mm2 using a low-speed diamond saw under water cooling.

The specimens were tested using a universal testing machine at crosshead speed of 1 mm/min [Figure 2].
Figure 2: Evaluation of microtensile bond strength: (a) Extracted premolars, (b) Etching, application of bonding agent followed by composite buildup, (c and d) Sectioning of the teeth, (e) Testing of microtensile bond strength using universal testing machine

Click here to view


The exact dimension of each fractured beam was individually measured using a digital caliper, from which the μTBS was calculated in MPa by using the formula:

μTBS = F/A.


   Results Top


According to the results of the present study, the mean value for antibacterial property of Group IA was 0.8, Group IIA was 0.15, and Group IIIA was 0.16. Maximum antibacterial efficacy against S. mutans was seen in Group IIIA (adhesive modified with 0.12% chitosan). This was followed by Group IIA (adhesive modified with 7% arginine). The least antibacterial efficacy was seen in Group IA which is an unmodified eighth-generation bonding agent. This result was statistically significant when all study groups were compared. However, there was no statistical difference between Groups IIA and IIIA. This result suggests that both 7% arginine and 0.2% chitosan had similar antibacterial action on S. mutans [Table 1] and [Table 2]. Microtensile bond strength was evaluated and the highest mean value (5.07) was seen in Group IIB, i.e., adhesive modified with 7% arginine. This was followed by Group IIIB which is adhesive modified with 0.12% chitosan (mean value: 4.14). Unmodified adhesive (Group IB) had the lowest mean bond strength value (4.07).
Table 1: Post hoc test to assess the difference between the study groups

Click here to view
Table 2: Difference between study groups for microtensile bond strength

Click here to view



   Discussion Top


Secondary caries is a significant challenge in restorative dentistry. Bacteria may remain trapped in the dental tissue during removal of carious substrate, since neither the clinical parameters of dentin hardness and color nor the caries-detector dyes are capable to ensure the complete removal of microorganisms. The inherent biodegradation of the interface between the tooth and the adhesive layer produces crevices that are readily colonized by caries pathogens such as S. mutans. Those crevices are also derived from polymerization shrinkage and improper resin-based composite layering. Although it is unlikely that biofilms can be eliminated from the crevices, the engineering of novel dentin adhesives that can shift the microbial ecology from a disease to a health state is greatly desirable.

According to the previous literature, 2% solution of CHX is bactericidal by precipitating cytoplasmic contents and leading to cell death. CHX is a popular antimicrobial agent and matrix metalloproteinase inhibitor.[4],[6]

In the present study, the eighth-generation bonding agent (G-Premio BOND, GC) was modified with 7% arginine and 0.12% chitosan. The eighth-generation bonding agent (GC BRAND) uses nanosized fillers which increases the penetration of the resin monomers and the hybrid layer thickness, thus improving the mechanical properties of the adhesive. Other advantages include bonding with all substrates and being a dual-cure mode of polymerization.

Arginine entering the mouth can be metabolized by certain oral bacteria via the Arginine Deiminase Pathway (ADI Pathway) to produce ammonia, which neutralizes glycolytic acids and contributes to the pH rise of oral biofilms. Ammonia production via the ADS results in cytoplasmic and environmental pH increases and benefits oral bacteria in the following ways: (i) Protecting them against acid killing, (ii) providing bioenergetic advantages that include increasing ΔpH and synthesizing ATP, and (iii) maintaining a relatively neutral environmental pH that is less favorable for the outgrowth of a cariogenic microflora.[1] One of the suggested mechanisms of chitosan's antibacterial characteristics is that the interaction between positively charged chitosan and a negatively charged bacterial cell could change the bacterial cell permeability, leading to the leakage of intercellular components and cell death.[5]

In this study, DCT was used to evaluate the antibacterial property of modified adhesives. DCT was introduced to determine the effect of direct contact between the tested materials and the test microorganism. The DCT is a quantitative method and provides information on the viability and bacterial growth rate.[5] The microtensile bond strength was checked to evaluate whether the modified adhesive hampers the original properties of adhesive or no.

The results of this study reject the null hypothesis since the incorporation of increasing concentration of 7% arginine and 0.12% chitosan enhanced the antibacterial activity of the adhesive resin. The addition of 7% arginine and 0.12% chitosan into a generic dental adhesive formulation did not compromise the physical and mechanical properties tested; however, the higher concentrations of arginine and chitosan solution (0.5% and 1% [w/w]) incorporated into the adhesive resin affected the adhesive properties.


   Conclusions Top


Under the limitations of this study, the following conclusions can be drawn – the eighth-generation bonding agent modified with 7% arginine and 0.12% chitosan showed antibacterial efficacy against S. mutans. This was statistically significant when compared to unmodified adhesive. Eighth-generation bonding agent modified with 7% arginine and 0.12% chitosan presented similar antibacterial efficacy. The eighth-generation bonding agent modified with 7% arginine and 0.12% chitosan had higher tensile bond strength values as compared to unmodified adhesive; however, this was not statistically significant.

Financial support and sponsorship

Nil.

Conflicts of interest

There are no conflicts of interest.



 
   References Top

1.
Geraldelia S, Soaresb EF, Alvarezc AJ, Farivard T, Shielde RC, Sinhoretif MA, et al. A new arginine-based dental adhesive system, formulation, mechanical and anti-caries properties. J Dent 2017;63:72-80.  Back to cited text no. 1
    
2.
Ganesh R. Dentin bonding agents – A review. Acta Sci Dent Sci 2019;3:108-11.  Back to cited text no. 2
    
3.
Migliau G. Classification review of dental adhesive systems: From the IV generation to the universal type. Ann Stomatol 2017;8:1.  Back to cited text no. 3
    
4.
Stanislawczuk R, Pereira F, Muñoz MA, Luque I, Farago PV, Reis A, et al. Effects of chlorhexidine-containing adhesives on the durability of resin-dentine interfaces. J Dent 2014;42:39-47.  Back to cited text no. 4
    
5.
Elaska SE. Antibacterial activity and adhesive properties of a chitosan – Containing dental adhesive in vitro. Quintessence Int 2012;43:603-13.  Back to cited text no. 5
    
6.
Cha HS, Shin DH. Antibacterial capacity of cavity disinfectants against Streptococcus mutans and their effects on shear bond strength of a self-etch adhesive. Dent Mater J 2016;35:147-52.  Back to cited text no. 6
    

Top
Correspondence Address:
Dr. Himali Rajan Desai
505, B Wing, Phase II, Anandi Baug, Next to Podar International School, Pimpri, Pune – 411018, Maharashtra
India
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/jcd.jcd_189_22

Rights and Permissions


    Figures

  [Figure 1], [Figure 2]
 
 
    Tables

  [Table 1], [Table 2]



 

Top
 
 
 
  Search
 
 
    Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
    Email Alert *
    Add to My List *
* Registration required (free)  
 


    Abstract
   Introduction
   Methods
   Results
   Discussion
   Conclusions
    References
    Article Figures
    Article Tables

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed94    
    Printed12    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded8    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal