Potential of Vanillin-Enhanced Adhesive to Reduce Cariogenic Biofilm

Article Preview

Abstract:

This investigation assessed how incorporating vanillin into a dental adhesive influences bacterial adhesion and biofilm formation. Experimental adhesives, formulated with 0.5% and 1.0% vanillin, were compared against a vanillin-free adhesive and a control using a multi-species biofilm model. No significant differences in bacterial adhesion were observed across the groups, with optical density (OD) values ranging from 0.28 to 0.40. In contrast, adhesives containing vanillin demonstrated a marked reduction in biofilm formation. After 48 hours, the strongest inhibition was recorded for the 1.0% vanillin adhesive (0.63 ± 0.07), followed by the 0.5% vanillin adhesive (0.77 ± 0.04), which were significantly lower than the vanillin-free (1.19 ± 0.08) and control (1.68 ± 0.05) groups. While biofilm accumulation increased in all groups by 72 hours, the vanillin-containing adhesives consistently maintained lower values than the controls. A concentration-dependent effect was confirmed by percent reduction analysis, which showed the 1.0% vanillin adhesive lowered biofilm by 62.5% at 48 hours and 45.0% at 72 hours. Vanillin also suppressed acidogenicity, as reflected by significantly higher culture medium pH values that remained near neutral at both 48 and 72 h, while the vanillin-free adhesive and control dropped below the critical pH 5.5 threshold. These findings suggest that vanillin effectively suppresses biofilm development without impacting bacterial adhesion, potentially serving as a natural additive to enhance the antibacterial properties of dental adhesives and minimize the risk of secondary caries.

You might also be interested in these eBooks

Info:

Pages:

51-56

Citation:

Online since:

May 2026

Export:

Price:

Permissions CCC:

Permissions PLS:

Сopyright:

© 2026 Trans Tech Publications Ltd. All Rights Reserved

Share:

Citation:

* - Corresponding Author

[1] M.J.M.C. Santos, E. Zare, P. McDermott G.C. Santos: Dent. J Vol. 12 (2024), p.291

Google Scholar

[2] S. Mo, W. Bao, Lai G, Wang J. Li M: BMC. Infect. Dis Vol. 10 (2010), p.241

Google Scholar

[3] P.D. Marsh: BMC. Oral Health Vol. 3 (2003), p.1

Google Scholar

[4] D.J. Fitzgerald, M. Stratford, M.J. Gasson, J. Ueckert, A. Bos, A. Narbad: J. Appl. Microbiol Vol. 97 (2004), p.104

DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2672.2004.02275.x

Google Scholar

[5] J.H. Kim, H.O. Lee, Y.J. Cho, et al: PLoS. One Vol. 9 (2014), p. e89122

Google Scholar

[6] P. Chen, Y. Liu, C. Li, S. Hua, C. Sun, L. Huang: Heliyon Vol. 9 (2023), p. e19280

Google Scholar

[7] S. Thaweboon, M. Fujita, K. Nagano, B. Thaweboon: Key. Eng. Mater Vol. 835 (2020), p.31

Google Scholar

[8] S. Thaweboon, B. Thaweboon: Key. Eng. Mater Vol. 801 (2019), p.9

Google Scholar

[9] B. Thaweboon, S. Thaweboon: Key. Eng. Mater Vol. 889 (2021), p.107

Google Scholar

[10] X. Qiu, B. Wang, S. Ren, X. Liu, Y. Wang: Water. Res Vol. 253 (2024), p.21222

Google Scholar

[11] P. Chen, Y. Liu, C. Li, S. Hua, C. Sun, L. Huang: Heliyon Vol. 9 (2023), p. e19280

Google Scholar

[12] J. Youn, K.D. Patel, A. Perriman, J.S. Sung, M. Patel, L.S. Bouchard, R. Patel: J Mater. Chem. B Vol. 12 (2024), p.10446

DOI: 10.1039/d4tb01362j

Google Scholar

[13] M.L. Pereira, D.C.P. Santos, C.A.M. Soaresm et al.: J. Funct. Biomater Vol. 13 (2022), p.149

Google Scholar

[14] Y.E. Wang, S. Im, H. Kim, et al.: Int. J. Mol. Sci Vol. 22 (2021), p.11915

Google Scholar

[15] M. El-Deeb, M.M. Ismail, E.R. Kenawy, N.A. Habib: Discov. Appl. Sci Vol. 6 (2024), p.120

Google Scholar