Logo do repositório

Efficacy of bioactive materials in preventing Streptococcus mutans-induced caries on enamel and dentine

dc.contributor.authorContreras, Sheila Mondragón [UNESP]
dc.contributor.authorFernandes, Juliana Benace [UNESP]
dc.contributor.authorSpinola, Manuela da Silva
dc.contributor.authorGarcia, Maíra Terra [UNESP]
dc.contributor.authorJunqueira, Juliana Campos [UNESP]
dc.contributor.authorBresciani, Eduardo [UNESP]
dc.contributor.authorCaneppele, Taciana Marco Ferraz [UNESP]
dc.contributor.institutionUniversidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP)
dc.contributor.institutionBraz Cubas University
dc.date.accessioned2025-04-29T20:03:09Z
dc.date.issued2023-10-01
dc.description.abstractThe study investigated the ability of bioactive materials used to restore enamel and dentine specimens to prevent caries. Enamel (n = 50) and dentine (n = 50) specimens were obtained from bovine incisors, prepared, and randomly allocated to one of five groups according to the restorative treatment: alkasite without adhesive system; alkasite with adhesive system; high viscosity glass ionomer cement; resin composite; no restoration; negative control group. Specimens were restored, exposed to a thermal cycling aging protocol, sterilized, and exposed to a cariogenic challenge induced by Streptococcus mutans and then submitted to surface and subsurface microhardness tests and polarized light microscopy to verify the caries lesion development in enamel or dentine surrounding the restorative materials. Data were analyzed using one-way ANOVA. In enamel and dentine, glass ionomer cement, alkasite without and with adhesive system presented a lower percentage surface microhardness loss than resin composite and negative control. Enamel subsurface microhardness presented no statistically significant differences between glass ionomer cement, alkasite without and with adhesive system. Glass ionomer cement also did not present statistically significant differences from resin composite and the negative control. In dentine, glass ionomer cement showed the highest subsurface microhardness values. In conclusion, bioactive restorative materials provide greater protection to enamel and dentine against surface caries development than resin composite.en
dc.description.affiliationDepartment of Restorative Dentistry São Paulo State University – UNESP Institute of Science and Technology
dc.description.affiliationBraz Cubas University
dc.description.affiliationDepartment of Biosciences and Oral Diagnosis São Paulo State University – UNESP Institute of Science and Technology
dc.description.affiliationUnespDepartment of Restorative Dentistry São Paulo State University – UNESP Institute of Science and Technology
dc.description.affiliationUnespDepartment of Biosciences and Oral Diagnosis São Paulo State University – UNESP Institute of Science and Technology
dc.description.sponsorshipFundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo (FAPESP)
dc.description.sponsorshipIdFAPESP: 2019/14729-9
dc.identifierhttp://dx.doi.org/10.1111/eos.12948
dc.identifier.citationEuropean Journal of Oral Sciences, v. 131, n. 5-6, 2023.
dc.identifier.doi10.1111/eos.12948
dc.identifier.issn1600-0722
dc.identifier.issn0909-8836
dc.identifier.scopus2-s2.0-85167967049
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/11449/305460
dc.language.isoeng
dc.relation.ispartofEuropean Journal of Oral Sciences
dc.sourceScopus
dc.subjectalkasite
dc.subjectdental caries
dc.subjectglass ionomer cements
dc.subjectresin composites
dc.titleEfficacy of bioactive materials in preventing Streptococcus mutans-induced caries on enamel and dentineen
dc.typeArtigopt
dspace.entity.typePublication
unesp.author.orcid0000-0001-7081-5238[1]
unesp.author.orcid0000-0003-2366-3061[2]
unesp.author.orcid0000-0001-9915-5173[3]
unesp.author.orcid0000-0002-1193-2909[4]
unesp.author.orcid0000-0001-6646-6856[5]
unesp.author.orcid0000-0001-9299-8792[6]
unesp.author.orcid0000-0003-0521-7922[7]

Arquivos

Coleções