ArticleJournal of applied oral science : revista FOB
Analysis by confocal laser scanning microscopy of the MDPB bactericidal effect on S. mutans biofilm CLSM analysis of MDPB bactericidal effect on biofilm.
Article in Journal of applied oral science : revista FOB. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
15 citing papers in PubMed, 44 citations in OpenAlex.
- Influence of Copper onMicroorganisms · 2024Article
- Characterization and morphological methods for oral biofilm visualization: where are we nowadays?AIMS microbiology · 2024Review
- Antibacterial effect, cytotoxicity, and bond strength of a modified dental adhesive containing silver nanoparticles.Odontology · 2023Article
- Novel Dental Restorative Solutions for Natural Teeth and Implants.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Article
- Bibliometric Analysis of Literature Published on Antibacterial Dental Adhesive from 1996-2020.Polymers · 2020Review
- In vitro and ex vivo systems at the forefront of infection modeling and drug discovery.Biomaterials · 2019Review
- Flow Cytometry Analysis of Antibacterial Effects of Universal Dentin Bonding Agents onMolecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2019Article
- Development of anJournal of oral microbiology · 2019Article
- Comparison of biofilm formation and migration of Streptococcus mutans on tooth roots and titanium miniscrews.Clinical and experimental dental research · 2018Article
- Antibacterial Activity of Commercial Dentine Bonding Systems against E. faecalis-Flow Cytometry Study.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2017Article
- Experimental Models of Oral Biofilms Developed on Inert Substrates: A Review of the Literature.BioMed research international · 2016Review
- Antibacterial properties of Acinetobacter baumannii phage Abp1 endolysin (PlyAB1).BMC infectious diseases · 2014Article
- Development of an antibacterial root canal filling system containing MDPB.Journal of dental research · 2014Article
- Efficacy of Liquorice and Propolis Extract Used as Cavity Cleaning Agents againstInternational journal of clinical pediatric dentistryArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
unlabelledSince bacteria remain in the dentin following caries removal, restorative materials with antibacterial properties are desirable to help maintaining the residual microorganisms inactive. The adhesive system Clearfil Protect Bond (PB) contains the antibacterial monomer 12-methacryloyloxydodecylpyridinium bromide (MDPB) in its primer, which has shown antimicrobial activity. However, its bactericidal effect against biofilm on the dentin has been little investigated.
objectiveThe aim of this study was to analyze by confocal laser scanning microscopy (CLSM) and viable bacteria counting (CFU) the MDPB bactericidal effect against S. mutans biofilm on the dentin surface. MATERIAL AND
methodsBovine dentin surfaces were obtained and subjected to S. mutans biofilm formation in BHI broth supplemented with 1% (w/v) sucrose for 18 h. Samples were divided into three groups, according to the primer application (n=3): Clearfil Protect Bond (PB), Clearfil SE Bond, which does not contain MDPB, (SE) and saline (control group). After the biofilm formation, Live/ Dead stain was applied directly to the surface of each sample. Next, 10 µL of each primer were applied on the samples during 590 s for the real-time CLSM analysis. The experiment was conducted in triplicate. The primers and saline were also applied on the other dentin samples during 20, 90, 300 and 590 s (n=9 for each group and period evaluated) and the CFU were assessed by colonies counting.
resultsThe results of the CLSM showed that with the Se application, although non-viable bacteria were detected at 20 s, there was no increase in their count during 590 s. In contrast, after the PB application there was a gradual increase of non-viable bacteria over 590 s.
conclusionsThe quantitative analysis demonstrated a significant decrease of S. mutans CFU at 90 s PB exposure and only after 300 s of Se application. Protect Bond showed an earlier antibacterial effect than Se Bond.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.