Acid Buffer Capacity and Compressive Strength of Bioactive Restorative Materials in the Cariogenic pH Solution

Abstract:

New bioactive materials were developed with claims of potential remineralization in the oral environment, particularly in acidic conditions. Direct bioactive restorative materials should resist mechanical load from mastication in saliva pH changes. However, the lack of evidence still exists on its bioactive ability to prevent demineralization. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effects of cariogenic pH solution on acid buffer capacity and compressive strength of bioactive restorative materials. Thirty disc-shaped specimens of 5 commercial bioactive restorative materials were selected (diameter 15mm; thickness 1mm) and were immersed in 10ml of cariogenic pH solution (pH 4.7) at 37 ± 1°C. They were then evaluated for its buffer capacity using a pH meter every 30, 60, 90, 120, and 150 minutes respectively. Twelve specimens (diameter 4mm; height 6mm) of each material were immersed in a group of cariogenic pH solutions with pH 7 and 4.5 for 7 days. The compressive strength was tested using Universal Testing Machine and statistically analyzed by One-way ANOVA and Kruskal Wallis. The results showed an increase in pH of the cariogenic solution of all materials and an increasing immersion time. The compressive strength of Activa Bioactive Restorative had the lowest value after immersion in cariogenic solution pH 4.5. It can be concluded that bioactive restorative materials have a buffering capacity that can increase cariogenic pH solution towards neutral conditions within 150 minutes of immersion. Alkasite composite resin and Zirconomer Improved immersed for 7 days in cariogenic pH solution to stay stable at pH 4.5 and 7.

• Periodical: Materials Science Forum (Volume 1069)
• Pages: 167-173
• DOI: https://doi.org/10.4028/p-391smw
• Online since: August 2022
• Authors: Yosi Kusuma Eriwati*, Windy Almyra Hanyouri, Martin Dharma, Bambang Irawan
• Keywords: Bioactive Restorative Material, Buffer Capacity, Compressive Strength, Immersion Time

References

[1] Pulpdent Corporation. Activa Bioactive Overview [Internet]. 2019. Available from: https://www.pulpdent.com/activa-bioactive-overview/.

[2] D.P. Antunes, R. Marques, D.M. Marinho, M. Carneiro, V. Garakis. Buffer Capacity of Saliva as a Function of Time after Consumption of Sugary, Sugar-Free and Probiotic Chewing Gums. Brazilian Res Pediatr Dent Integr Clin. 15 (2015):153–61.

DOI: 10.4034/pboci.2015.151.17

[3] I. Nedeljkovic, J.D. Munck, V. Slomka, B. Van Meerbeek, W. Teughels, K.L. Van Landuyt. Lack of Buffering by Composites Promotes Shift to More Cariogenic Bacteria. J Dent Res. 95 (2016):875–81.

DOI: 10.1177/0022034516647677

[4] S.K. Sidhu, J.W. Nicholson. A Review of Glass-Ionomer Cements for Clinical Dentistry. J Funct Biomater. 7 (2016):16.

[5] M. Fuss, J. Wicht, T. Attin, H.M. Derman, M.J. Noack. Protective Buffering Capacity of Restorative Dental Materials In Vitro. J Adhes Dent. 19 (2017):177–83.

[6] J.L. Moreau, H.H.K. Xu. Fluoride Releasing Restorative Materials: Effects of pH on Mechanical Properties and Ion Release. Dent Mater. 26 (2010):e227-35.

DOI: 10.1016/j.dental.2010.07.004

[7] N. Gupta, S. Jaiswal, P. Bansal. Comparison of Fluoride Ion Release and Alkalizing Potential of A New Bulk-Fill Alkasite. J Conserv Dent. 22 (2019):296–9.

DOI: 10.4103/jcd.jcd_74_19

[8] Y. Wang, M. Kaga, D. Kajiwara, H. Minamikawa, S. Kakuda, M. Hashimoto. Ion Release and Buffering Capacity of S-PRG Filler-containing Pit and Fissure Sealant in Lactic Acid. Nano Biomed. 3 (2011):275–81.

[9] A. Asali. Fluoride Release, pH change and Recharge Ability of Different Types of Glass Ionomer Restorative Materials: A Comparative In-Vitro Study. ProQuest Dissertations and Thesis. (2016).

[10] S. Krishnamurthy, J. Narasimhan, R.B. Nammalwar. The Effect of Capsulated Glass Ionomer Cements on The pH of a Lactic Acid Solution: An In-Vitro Study. J Clin Diagnostic Res. 6 (2012):316–8.

[11] S. Tiwari, M. Kenchappa, D. Bhayya, S. Gupta, S. Saxena, S. Satyarth. Antibacterial Activity and Fluoride Release of Glass-Ionomer Cement, Compomer and Zirconia Reinforced Glass-Ionomer Cement. J Clin Diagnostic Res. 10 (2016):ZC90–3.

DOI: 10.7860/jcdr/2016/16282.7676

[12] S. Virmani, M. Hegde, S. Shetty, V. Sadananda. Comparative Evaluation of Fluoride Release from Three Glass Ionomer Cements – An in vitro Study. Br J Appl Sci Technol. 18 (2016):1–6.

DOI: 10.9734/bjast/2016/26398

[13] M. Buzalaf. Fluoride and the Oral Environment. Monogr Oral Sci, Basel, Karger. 22 (2011):97–114.

[14] G.J. Mount, W.R. Hume, H.C. Ngo, M.S. Wolff. Preservation and Restoration of Tooth Structure. 3rd Ed. Wiley Blackwell; 2016, p.44.

[15] S. Baliga, S. Muglikar, R. Kale. Salivary pH: A diagnostic biomarker. J Indian Soc Periodontol. 17 (2013):461.

DOI: 10.4103/0972-124x.118317

[16] E. Korkut, O. Gezgin, F. Tulumbacı, H. Özer, Y. Şener. Comparative Evaluation of Mechanical Properties of a Bioactive Resin Modified Glass Ionomer Cement. EÜ Dişhek Fak Derg. 38 (2017):170-5.

DOI: 10.5505/eudfd.2017.38243

[17] T.N.A.T. Rahim, D. Mohamad, H.M. Akil, I.A. Rahman. Water sorption characteristics of restorative dental composites immersed in acidic drinks. Dent Mater. 28 (2012):e63-70.

DOI: 10.1016/j.dental.2012.03.011

[18] X. Xu, J.O. Burgess. Compressive strength, fluoride release and recharge of fluoride-releasing materials. Biomater. 24 (2003):2451-61.

DOI: 10.1016/s0142-9612(02)00638-5

[19] N. Abdulsamee, A.H. Elkhadem. Zirconomer and Zirconomer Improved (White Amalgams): Restorative Materials for the Future. Review. EC Dent Sci. 4 (2017):134–50.

[20] C.H. Phin, K. Shetty, K. Kunaparaju. Effect of Alcoholic Beverages on the Surface Microhardness of Three Restorative Materials. J Int Dent Med Res. 13 (2020):1268-75.

[21] A.A.R. Al-Shekhli, I.A. Aubi. Compressive Strength Evaluation of Giomer and Compomer Storage in Different Media. J Int Dent Med Res. 13 (2020):23-28.

[22] N.S.W.N. Hajira, N. Meena. GIOMER- The Intelligent Particle (New Generation Glass Ionomer Cement). Int J Dent Oral Health. 2 (2015):1-5.

DOI: 10.16966/2378-7090.166

[23] D. Jayaraj, E.P. Simon, M.R. Kumar. Cention-N: A Review. Dent Bites. 5 (2018):14-21.

[24] P. Poornima, P. Koley, M. Kenchappa, N.B. Nagaveni, K.P. Bharath, I.E. Neena. Comparative evaluation of compressive strength and surface microhardness of EQUIA Forte, resin‑modified glass‑ionomer cement with conventional glass‑ionomer cement. J Indian Soc Pedod Prev Dent. 37 (2019):265-70.

DOI: 10.4103/jisppd.jisppd_342_18

[25] C. Ruengrungsom, M.F. Burrow, P. Parashos, J.E.A. Palamara. Evaluation of F, Ca, and P release and microhardness of eleven ion-leaching restorative materials and the recharge efficacy using a new Ca/P containing fluoride varnish. J Dent. 102 (2020):1-12.

DOI: 10.1016/j.jdent.2020.103474