Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2022 Jul 20;15(14):5044.
doi: 10.3390/ma15145044.

Clinical and Microbiological Evaluation of a Chlorhexidine-Modified Glass Ionomer Cement (GIC-CHX) Restoration Placed Using the Atraumatic Restorative Treatment (ART) Technique

Affiliations

Clinical and Microbiological Evaluation of a Chlorhexidine-Modified Glass Ionomer Cement (GIC-CHX) Restoration Placed Using the Atraumatic Restorative Treatment (ART) Technique

Jithendra Ratnayake et al. Materials (Basel). .

Abstract

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® 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 (n = 25, 96%) and did not feel anxious during the procedure (n = 24, 92%). Forty-eight percent (n = 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 (p = 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.

Keywords: atraumatic restorative treatment (ART) technique; chlorhexidine digluconate (CHX); glass ionomer cement (GIC); restoration survival; root caries.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
(A) Root caries lesion; (B) root caries lesion restored with GIC-CHX using the ART technique.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Flow chart for the microbiological study.
Figure 3
Figure 3
The mean counts of Candida (Sabouraud/SDA), total anaerobic bacteria (CBA), Streptococcus mutans (MSA), and lactobacilli (Rogosa) (Log10 (CFU/mg)) for plaque taken from GIC-CHX and control GIC restorations at each time period investigated and saliva (Log10 (CFU/mg). (Red: CHX; blue dashes: GIC; grey: saliva).

References

    1. Fontana M., Zero D.T. Assessing patients’ caries risk. J. Am. Dent. Assoc. 2006;137:1231–1239. doi: 10.14219/jada.archive.2006.0380. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Marcenes W., Kassebaum N.J., Bernabé E., Flaxman A., Naghavi M., Lopez A., Murray C.J. Global burden of oral conditions in 1990–2010: A systematic analysis. J. Dent. Res. 2013;92:592–597. doi: 10.1177/0022034513490168. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Hellyer P.H., Beighton D., Heath M.R., Lynch E.J. Root caries in older people attending a general dental practice in East Sussex. Br. Dent. J. 1990;169:201–206. doi: 10.1038/sj.bdj.4807326. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Papas A.S., Joshi A., Belanger A.J., Kent J.R.L., Palmer A.C., DePaola P.F. Dietary models for root caries. Am. J. Clin. Nutr. 1995;61:417S–422S. doi: 10.1093/ajcn/61.2.417S. - DOI - PubMed
    1. AlQranei M.S., Balhaddad A.A., Melo M.A.S. The burden of root caries. Gerodontology. 2021;38:136–153. doi: 10.1111/ger.12511. - DOI - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources