四种不同黏合剂在两个时间段对三种细菌的抑菌效果评价:体外比较研究

IF 0.6 Q4 DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE Journal of Advanced Oral Research Pub Date : 2022-03-27 DOI:10.1177/23202068221084452
Sami Ünal, Şeyhmus Bakır, E. Bakır
{"title":"四种不同黏合剂在两个时间段对三种细菌的抑菌效果评价:体外比较研究","authors":"Sami Ünal, Şeyhmus Bakır, E. Bakır","doi":"10.1177/23202068221084452","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Aim: The study aimed at evaluating the antibacterial activities of four adhesive systems against three bacterial species in two time periods. Material and Method: Four different antibacterial adhesive materials, a nonantibacterial adhesive (Clearfil SE Bond), and a vancomycin-impregnated antibiogram disc were used in the study. The antibacterial activities of Gluma 2 Bond, Clearfil SE Protect Bond (CPB) Primer, FL Bond II (FLB), and Peak Universal Bond (PUB) on Enterococcus faecalis, Streptococcus mutans, and Lactobacillus acidophilus were evaluated by the disc diffusion method. Antibiogram discs onto which the adhesive agent was dripped were placed on agar plates at intervals. Inhibition zone diameters around the discs, which were incubated, were measured. Statistical analysis was done with the one-way analysis of variance. Results: As a result of our study, it was concluded that the CPB Primer was the agent with the highest antibacterial activity, including the control group. One of the remarkable findings in our study was that CPB Primer showed the most significant effect against Streptococcus mutans among microorganisms. Although not statistically significant, the antibacterial effect of adhesive agents at the end of the 48th h was found to be higher than at the end of the 24th h (P > .05). Conclusion: The strong antibacterial activity of the CPB Primer on all three bacteria suggests that it is a preferable adhesive agent in deep dentinal caries as well as in initial caries lesions.","PeriodicalId":43017,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Advanced Oral Research","volume":"123 1","pages":"120 - 126"},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2022-03-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Evaluation of the Antibacterial Effects of Four Different Adhesives Against Three Bacterial Species in Two Time Periods: An In Vitro Comparative Study\",\"authors\":\"Sami Ünal, Şeyhmus Bakır, E. Bakır\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/23202068221084452\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Aim: The study aimed at evaluating the antibacterial activities of four adhesive systems against three bacterial species in two time periods. Material and Method: Four different antibacterial adhesive materials, a nonantibacterial adhesive (Clearfil SE Bond), and a vancomycin-impregnated antibiogram disc were used in the study. The antibacterial activities of Gluma 2 Bond, Clearfil SE Protect Bond (CPB) Primer, FL Bond II (FLB), and Peak Universal Bond (PUB) on Enterococcus faecalis, Streptococcus mutans, and Lactobacillus acidophilus were evaluated by the disc diffusion method. Antibiogram discs onto which the adhesive agent was dripped were placed on agar plates at intervals. Inhibition zone diameters around the discs, which were incubated, were measured. Statistical analysis was done with the one-way analysis of variance. Results: As a result of our study, it was concluded that the CPB Primer was the agent with the highest antibacterial activity, including the control group. One of the remarkable findings in our study was that CPB Primer showed the most significant effect against Streptococcus mutans among microorganisms. Although not statistically significant, the antibacterial effect of adhesive agents at the end of the 48th h was found to be higher than at the end of the 24th h (P > .05). Conclusion: The strong antibacterial activity of the CPB Primer on all three bacteria suggests that it is a preferable adhesive agent in deep dentinal caries as well as in initial caries lesions.\",\"PeriodicalId\":43017,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Advanced Oral Research\",\"volume\":\"123 1\",\"pages\":\"120 - 126\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-03-27\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Advanced Oral Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/23202068221084452\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Advanced Oral Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/23202068221084452","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:研究四种胶粘剂体系在两个时间段内对三种细菌的抑菌活性。材料与方法:采用四种不同的抗菌胶粘剂材料,一种非抗菌胶粘剂(Clearfil SE Bond)和万古霉素浸渍的抗生素片进行研究。采用光盘扩散法评价Gluma 2 Bond、Clearfil SE Protect Bond (CPB)引物、FL Bond II (FLB)和Peak Universal Bond (PUB)对粪肠球菌、变形链球菌和嗜酸乳杆菌的抑菌活性。滴入黏合剂的抗生素片每隔一段时间放置在琼脂板上。测定了培养皿周围的抑制带直径。统计分析采用单因素方差分析。结果:我们的研究结果表明CPB引物是抗菌活性最高的药剂,包括对照组。在我们的研究中一个值得注意的发现是CPB引物在微生物中对变形链球菌的作用最为显著。虽然无统计学意义,但粘接剂在48h末的抗菌效果明显高于24h末(P > 0.05)。结论:CPB引物对三种细菌均有较强的抑菌活性,是治疗牙本质深部龋及初发龋的较好粘结剂。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Evaluation of the Antibacterial Effects of Four Different Adhesives Against Three Bacterial Species in Two Time Periods: An In Vitro Comparative Study
Aim: The study aimed at evaluating the antibacterial activities of four adhesive systems against three bacterial species in two time periods. Material and Method: Four different antibacterial adhesive materials, a nonantibacterial adhesive (Clearfil SE Bond), and a vancomycin-impregnated antibiogram disc were used in the study. The antibacterial activities of Gluma 2 Bond, Clearfil SE Protect Bond (CPB) Primer, FL Bond II (FLB), and Peak Universal Bond (PUB) on Enterococcus faecalis, Streptococcus mutans, and Lactobacillus acidophilus were evaluated by the disc diffusion method. Antibiogram discs onto which the adhesive agent was dripped were placed on agar plates at intervals. Inhibition zone diameters around the discs, which were incubated, were measured. Statistical analysis was done with the one-way analysis of variance. Results: As a result of our study, it was concluded that the CPB Primer was the agent with the highest antibacterial activity, including the control group. One of the remarkable findings in our study was that CPB Primer showed the most significant effect against Streptococcus mutans among microorganisms. Although not statistically significant, the antibacterial effect of adhesive agents at the end of the 48th h was found to be higher than at the end of the 24th h (P > .05). Conclusion: The strong antibacterial activity of the CPB Primer on all three bacteria suggests that it is a preferable adhesive agent in deep dentinal caries as well as in initial caries lesions.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Advanced Oral Research
Journal of Advanced Oral Research DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE-
CiteScore
1.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
18
期刊最新文献
Radiographic Outcomes of Mineral Trioxide Aggregate (MTA) with and Without Platelet-Rich Fibrin (PRF) In Direct Pulp Capping: A Clinical Pilot Study Mineralized Collagen Fiber-based Dental Implant: Novel Perspectives Do Polishing Methods and Colorant Beverages Affect the Color Stainability of 3D-printed Permanent Restorations? The Intraoral Findings of the Patient with Robinow Syndrome and the Related Dental Treatment Approaches: A Case Report Effect of Bleaching on the Microhardness and Modulus of Elasticity of ACTIVA BioACTIVE – RESTORATIVE: An In Vitro Study
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1