الفهرس 
IntroductionOnly 14 pages are availabe for public view
 |  | from | 143 |  |  |
| | | from | 143 | | |
Abstract
This study was carried out to evaluate the antibacterial effect of three
highly viscous glass ionomer restorative materials; Fuji IX GP, Ketac Molar easy mix and Riva self cure GIC after addition of two types of
Chlorhexidine; 1% Chlorhexidine diacetate hydrate (CHX1) in the powder
form and 1% Chlorhexidine digluconate (CHX2) in the liquid form against
two types of microorganisms; Streptococcus Mutans S.M and Lactobacillus Acidophilus L.A in vitro.
Fifty discs (10mm in diameter x 2mm in thickness) were prepared from each type of glass ionomer restorative materials, 150 discs in total. The fifty discs of each glass ionomer were divided into 3 groups according to addition of Chlorhexidine type; CHX1, CHX2 or no Chlorhexidine CHX0.
In the first group GICs were mixed with CHX1 (20 discs), in the second group GICs were mixed with CHX2 (20 discs) and the third group GICs without addition of Chlorhexidine CHX0 and it was the control group (10 discs). Each group was further subdivided into two subgroups according to the types of the tested microorganisms; Streptococcus mutans S.M and Lactobacillus acidophilus L.A. Using the agar diffusion test, the bacteria were cultivated in specific culture mediums; Trypticase- soy broth agar for S.M and Lactobacillus MRS broth agar for L.A. Petri dishes 15cm in diameter containing 30 ml agar to a thickness of 2 mm were seeded by 1ml of microbial suspension of each bacteria.
Ten discs from each GICs formulation were inserted into previously prepared wells in the agar medium in each Petri dish. Monitoring of the antibacterial effect was done at day zero and weekly for 91 days where a new dishes and fresh agar with microorganisms were prepared every7 days.
The antibacterial effect was estimated by measuring of the total inhibition zone (disc + inhibition zone around it) in millimeters by Digitalcaliper at three different points, and then the mean was recorded for each inhibition zone.
Results of the study showed large total inhibition zones at day zero for all tested groups against S.M and L.A which gradually decrease during the tested period. The largest inhibition zones against S.M were observed in the three GICs with Chlorhexidine diacetate hydrate (CHX1) Fuji IX GP GI1 (25.7 ± 1.18), ketac molar easy mix GI2(24.9 ± 0.39) and Riva self cure GI3 ( 24.7 ± 0.64) than with Chlorhexidine digluconate (CHX2) Fuji IX GP GI1 (20.15 ± 0.66), ketac molar easy mix GI2 (19.14 ± 0.67) and Riva self cure GI3 (15.66 ± 0.49) and the lowest was for GICs without Chlorhexidine CHX0 Fuji IX GP GI1( 13.68 ± 0.18), ketac molar easy mix GI2(13.43 ± 0.86) and Riva self cure GI3(12.77 ± 0.43). Whereas against L.A the inhibition zones were observed in the three GICs with Chlorhexidine diacetate hydrate (CHX1) Fuji IX GP GI1 (20.36 ± 0.54),
Ketac molar easy mix GI2 (19.70 ± 0.39) and Riva self cure GI3 (19.55 ± 0.48) than with Chlorhexidine digluconate(CHX2) Ketac molar easy mix GI2 (18.43 ± 0.86), Riva self cure GI3(17.72 ± 0.67) and Fuji IX GP GI1(16.67 ± 0.59) and the lowest was for GICs without Chlorhexidine CHX0 Fuji IX GP GI1(17.67 ± 0.29), Ketac molar easy mix GI2(17.29 ± 0.38) and Riva self cure GI3(14.95 ± 0.41).Fuji IX GP with Chlorhexidine
diacetate (GI1CHX1) against S.M had the largest inhibition zone (25.7 ±
1.18)and longer antibacterial effect (day 84) followed by Ketac molar with
Chlorhexidine diacetate (GI2CHX1) (24.9 ± 0.39) (day 84) while Riva with
Chlorhexidine diacetate (GI3CHX1) had the lowest inhibition zone and the
same longer antibacterial effect ( 24.7 ± 0.64) (day 84 ).While against L.A,
Fuji IX GP with Chlorhexidine diacetate (GI1CHX1) had the largest inhibition zone (20.36 ± 0.54) and longer antibacterial effect (day77) followed by Ketac molar with Chlorhexidine diacetate (GI2CHX1) ((19.70± 0.39) (day 70) while Riva with Chlorhexidine diacetate (GI3CHX1) had the lowest inhibition zone and shorter antibacterial effect (19.55 ± 0.48)
(day63).