ArticleInternational dental journal2026
Biological Performance of Modified Glass Ionomer Cement: Antibacterial Activity, Cytocompatibility, and Rabbit Pulpal Response.
Article in International dental journal, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundConventional glass ionomer cement (GIC) is widely used as a restorative base and liner owing to its chemical adhesion to dentine, fluoride release, and favourable biocompatibility. Nevertheless, its intrinsic antibacterial activity and regenerative capacity remain limited. To enhance these properties, a series of modified GIC formulations, referred to as BIOGIC, incorporating tricalcium phosphate (TCP), TCTP-derived peptides, and 10% chlorhexidine (CHX), were developed. This study evaluated their antibacterial efficacy, cytocompatibility, and pulpal responses in a rabbit-tooth model.
methodsSix formulations were examined: GIC, BIOGIC, BIOGIC+TCP, BIOGIC+TCP+3 µg TCTP, BIOGIC+TCP+10 µg TCTP, and BIOGIC+10% CHX. Antibacterial activity against Streptococcus mutans and Enterococcus faecalis was assessed using liquid culture assays and spread-plate analysis. Dental pulp cell viability was evaluated using a metabolic assay. In vivo pulpal responses were examined in rabbit incisors restored with each material and assessed histologically after 21 days, focusing on inflammation, collagen formation, and pulp-dentine integrity.
resultsBIOGIC+10% CHX demonstrated the strongest antibacterial activity, significantly reducing S. mutans and E. faecalis. Dental pulp cell viability decreased significantly in the GIC, BIOGIC+TCP+10 µg TCTP, and BIOGIC+10% CHX groups, with BIOGIC+10% CHX showing the greatest cytotoxicity. In contrast, BIOGIC, BIOGIC+TCP, and BIOGIC+TCP+3 µg TCTP significantly enhanced pulp cell proliferation. Histological analysis revealed no pulpal inflammation in any group. Mild collagen deposition was noted only in the BIOGIC group, whereas the remaining formulations exhibited normal pulp morphology without adverse reactions.
conclusionIncorporation of 10% CHX markedly enhanced the antibacterial properties of BIOGIC but increased cytotoxicity. BIOGIC formulations containing TCP and low-dose TCTP improved pulp cell viability and maintained favourable pulpal responses. These modified BIOGIC materials show promise as bioactive, pulp-compatible alternatives to conventional GIC, although CHX-containing formulations should be used with caution owing to their cytotoxic effects.
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.