Clinical and Microbiological Evaluation of a Chlorhexidine-Modified Glass Ionomer Cement (GIC-CHX) Restoration Placed Using the Atraumatic Restorative Treatment (ART) Technique
The aims of this study were to investigate the clinical effectiveness and patient acceptability of a modified glass ionomer cement placed using the atraumatic restorative treatment (ART) technique to treat root caries, and to carry out microbiological analysis of the restored sites. Two clinically v...
| Main Authors: | , , , , , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
MDPI AG
2022-07-01
|
| Series: | Materials |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1944/15/14/5044 |
| _version_ | 1797445470881054720 |
|---|---|
| author | Jithendra Ratnayake Arthi Veerasamy Hassan Ahmed David Coburn Carolina Loch Andrew R. Gray Karl M. Lyons Nicholas C. K. Heng Richard D. Cannon Marcus Leung Paul A. Brunton |
| author_facet | Jithendra Ratnayake Arthi Veerasamy Hassan Ahmed David Coburn Carolina Loch Andrew R. Gray Karl M. Lyons Nicholas C. K. Heng Richard D. Cannon Marcus Leung Paul A. Brunton |
| author_sort | Jithendra Ratnayake |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | The aims of this study were to investigate the clinical effectiveness and patient acceptability of a modified glass ionomer cement placed using the atraumatic restorative treatment (ART) technique to treat root caries, and to carry out microbiological analysis of the restored sites. Two clinically visible root surface carious lesions per participant were restored using ART. One was restored with commercial glass ionomer cement (GIC) (ChemFil<sup>®</sup> Superior, DENTSPLY, Konstonz, Germany) which acted as the control. The other carious root lesion was restored with the same GIC modified with 5% chlorhexidine digluconate (GIC-CHX; test). Patient acceptability and restoration survival rate were evaluated at baseline and after 6 months. Plaque and saliva samples around the test and control restorations were collected, and microbiological analysis for selected bacterial and fungal viability were completed at baseline, and after 1, 3, and 6 months. In total, 52 restorations were placed using GIC and GIC-CHX in 26 participants; 1 patient was lost to follow-up. After reviewing the restorations during their baseline appointments, participants indicated that they were satisfied with the appearance of the restorations (<i>n</i> = 25, 96%) and did not feel anxious during the procedure (<i>n</i> = 24, 92%). Forty-eight percent (<i>n</i> = 12) of the GIC-CHX restorations were continuous with the existing anatomic form as opposed to six for the GIC restorations (24%), a difference which was statistically significant (<i>p</i> = 0.036). There was no statistically significant reduction in the mean count of the tested microorganisms in plaque samples for either type of restorations after 1, 3, or 6 months. Restoration of carious root surfaces with GIC-CHX resulted in higher survival rates than the control GIC. ART using GIC-CHX may therefore be a viable approach for use in outreach dental services to restore root surface carious lesions where dental services are not readily available, and for older people and special needs groups. |
| first_indexed | 2024-03-09T13:27:15Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-653596d60b9a489eb5b1a5e09cb30563 |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 1996-1944 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-03-09T13:27:15Z |
| publishDate | 2022-07-01 |
| publisher | MDPI AG |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Materials |
| spelling | doaj.art-653596d60b9a489eb5b1a5e09cb305632023-11-30T21:22:46ZengMDPI AGMaterials1996-19442022-07-011514504410.3390/ma15145044Clinical and Microbiological Evaluation of a Chlorhexidine-Modified Glass Ionomer Cement (GIC-CHX) Restoration Placed Using the Atraumatic Restorative Treatment (ART) TechniqueJithendra Ratnayake0Arthi Veerasamy1Hassan Ahmed2David Coburn3Carolina Loch4Andrew R. Gray5Karl M. Lyons6Nicholas C. K. Heng7Richard D. Cannon8Marcus Leung9Paul A. Brunton10Sir John Walsh Research Institute, Faculty of Dentistry, University of Otago, P.O. Box 56, Dunedin 9054, New ZealandSir John Walsh Research Institute, Faculty of Dentistry, University of Otago, P.O. Box 56, Dunedin 9054, New ZealandSir John Walsh Research Institute, Faculty of Dentistry, University of Otago, P.O. Box 56, Dunedin 9054, New ZealandSir John Walsh Research Institute, Faculty of Dentistry, University of Otago, P.O. Box 56, Dunedin 9054, New ZealandSir John Walsh Research Institute, Faculty of Dentistry, University of Otago, P.O. Box 56, Dunedin 9054, New ZealandBiostatistics Centre, Division of Health Sciences, University of Otago, P.O. Box 56, Dunedin 9054, New ZealandSir John Walsh Research Institute, Faculty of Dentistry, University of Otago, P.O. Box 56, Dunedin 9054, New ZealandSir John Walsh Research Institute, Faculty of Dentistry, University of Otago, P.O. Box 56, Dunedin 9054, New ZealandSir John Walsh Research Institute, Faculty of Dentistry, University of Otago, P.O. Box 56, Dunedin 9054, New ZealandSir John Walsh Research Institute, Faculty of Dentistry, University of Otago, P.O. Box 56, Dunedin 9054, New ZealandCurtin University, Bentley, WA 6102, AustraliaThe aims of this study were to investigate the clinical effectiveness and patient acceptability of a modified glass ionomer cement placed using the atraumatic restorative treatment (ART) technique to treat root caries, and to carry out microbiological analysis of the restored sites. Two clinically visible root surface carious lesions per participant were restored using ART. One was restored with commercial glass ionomer cement (GIC) (ChemFil<sup>®</sup> Superior, DENTSPLY, Konstonz, Germany) which acted as the control. The other carious root lesion was restored with the same GIC modified with 5% chlorhexidine digluconate (GIC-CHX; test). Patient acceptability and restoration survival rate were evaluated at baseline and after 6 months. Plaque and saliva samples around the test and control restorations were collected, and microbiological analysis for selected bacterial and fungal viability were completed at baseline, and after 1, 3, and 6 months. In total, 52 restorations were placed using GIC and GIC-CHX in 26 participants; 1 patient was lost to follow-up. After reviewing the restorations during their baseline appointments, participants indicated that they were satisfied with the appearance of the restorations (<i>n</i> = 25, 96%) and did not feel anxious during the procedure (<i>n</i> = 24, 92%). Forty-eight percent (<i>n</i> = 12) of the GIC-CHX restorations were continuous with the existing anatomic form as opposed to six for the GIC restorations (24%), a difference which was statistically significant (<i>p</i> = 0.036). There was no statistically significant reduction in the mean count of the tested microorganisms in plaque samples for either type of restorations after 1, 3, or 6 months. Restoration of carious root surfaces with GIC-CHX resulted in higher survival rates than the control GIC. ART using GIC-CHX may therefore be a viable approach for use in outreach dental services to restore root surface carious lesions where dental services are not readily available, and for older people and special needs groups.https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1944/15/14/5044root cariesatraumatic restorative treatment (ART) techniqueglass ionomer cement (GIC)chlorhexidine digluconate (CHX)restoration survival |
| spellingShingle | Jithendra Ratnayake Arthi Veerasamy Hassan Ahmed David Coburn Carolina Loch Andrew R. Gray Karl M. Lyons Nicholas C. K. Heng Richard D. Cannon Marcus Leung Paul A. Brunton Clinical and Microbiological Evaluation of a Chlorhexidine-Modified Glass Ionomer Cement (GIC-CHX) Restoration Placed Using the Atraumatic Restorative Treatment (ART) Technique Materials root caries atraumatic restorative treatment (ART) technique glass ionomer cement (GIC) chlorhexidine digluconate (CHX) restoration survival |
| title | Clinical and Microbiological Evaluation of a Chlorhexidine-Modified Glass Ionomer Cement (GIC-CHX) Restoration Placed Using the Atraumatic Restorative Treatment (ART) Technique |
| title_full | Clinical and Microbiological Evaluation of a Chlorhexidine-Modified Glass Ionomer Cement (GIC-CHX) Restoration Placed Using the Atraumatic Restorative Treatment (ART) Technique |
| title_fullStr | Clinical and Microbiological Evaluation of a Chlorhexidine-Modified Glass Ionomer Cement (GIC-CHX) Restoration Placed Using the Atraumatic Restorative Treatment (ART) Technique |
| title_full_unstemmed | Clinical and Microbiological Evaluation of a Chlorhexidine-Modified Glass Ionomer Cement (GIC-CHX) Restoration Placed Using the Atraumatic Restorative Treatment (ART) Technique |
| title_short | Clinical and Microbiological Evaluation of a Chlorhexidine-Modified Glass Ionomer Cement (GIC-CHX) Restoration Placed Using the Atraumatic Restorative Treatment (ART) Technique |
| title_sort | clinical and microbiological evaluation of a chlorhexidine modified glass ionomer cement gic chx restoration placed using the atraumatic restorative treatment art technique |
| topic | root caries atraumatic restorative treatment (ART) technique glass ionomer cement (GIC) chlorhexidine digluconate (CHX) restoration survival |
| url | https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1944/15/14/5044 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT jithendraratnayake clinicalandmicrobiologicalevaluationofachlorhexidinemodifiedglassionomercementgicchxrestorationplacedusingtheatraumaticrestorativetreatmentarttechnique AT arthiveerasamy clinicalandmicrobiologicalevaluationofachlorhexidinemodifiedglassionomercementgicchxrestorationplacedusingtheatraumaticrestorativetreatmentarttechnique AT hassanahmed clinicalandmicrobiologicalevaluationofachlorhexidinemodifiedglassionomercementgicchxrestorationplacedusingtheatraumaticrestorativetreatmentarttechnique AT davidcoburn clinicalandmicrobiologicalevaluationofachlorhexidinemodifiedglassionomercementgicchxrestorationplacedusingtheatraumaticrestorativetreatmentarttechnique AT carolinaloch clinicalandmicrobiologicalevaluationofachlorhexidinemodifiedglassionomercementgicchxrestorationplacedusingtheatraumaticrestorativetreatmentarttechnique AT andrewrgray clinicalandmicrobiologicalevaluationofachlorhexidinemodifiedglassionomercementgicchxrestorationplacedusingtheatraumaticrestorativetreatmentarttechnique AT karlmlyons clinicalandmicrobiologicalevaluationofachlorhexidinemodifiedglassionomercementgicchxrestorationplacedusingtheatraumaticrestorativetreatmentarttechnique AT nicholasckheng clinicalandmicrobiologicalevaluationofachlorhexidinemodifiedglassionomercementgicchxrestorationplacedusingtheatraumaticrestorativetreatmentarttechnique AT richarddcannon clinicalandmicrobiologicalevaluationofachlorhexidinemodifiedglassionomercementgicchxrestorationplacedusingtheatraumaticrestorativetreatmentarttechnique AT marcusleung clinicalandmicrobiologicalevaluationofachlorhexidinemodifiedglassionomercementgicchxrestorationplacedusingtheatraumaticrestorativetreatmentarttechnique AT paulabrunton clinicalandmicrobiologicalevaluationofachlorhexidinemodifiedglassionomercementgicchxrestorationplacedusingtheatraumaticrestorativetreatmentarttechnique |