Antibacterial effect of Softsoap used to disinfect dentures.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the in vitro antibacterial effect of Softsoap and Efferdent used as solutions to disinfect Lucitone 199 poly(methyl methacrylate) (PMMA) resin used for dentures. METHODS: S. mutans and plaque bacteria were grown for 24 hours, and suspended to a concentration of 1x106 cells/ml. Bacterial suspensions (0.2 mL) were added to the decontaminated PMMA discs placed in a 48-well culture plate and incubated for 3 days at 37°C. The discs were rinsed to remove the unbound bacterial cells and then incubated for 60 minutes with 5% and 1% dilutions (triplicates) of each of the detergent solutions (0.3 ml). Discs were rinsed and then MTT reagent (0.2 ml) was added and incubated for 2 hours, then overnight with a solubilizing agent. An aliquot from each well (0.1 ml) was transferred to a 96-well flat bottom plate and absorbance was measured to OD @ 595 nm (MTT) of four samples for each data point. Normalized data was compared and statistically analyzed using a three-way ANOVA with Student-Newman-Keuls on Rank data with P< 0.05 for significance. Additionally, data were double-checked with the Holm-Sidak test. RESULTS: There was no statistically significant difference between testing media for C. albicans and mixed plaque (P= 0.078) or testing duration in time at 24 hours and 21 days (P= 0.07). Statistically significant differences were found between all treatment solutions group combinations (P< 0.001) except for 30% Softsoap versus Efferdent (P= 0.056). CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: There was no statistically significant difference between testing media for C. albicans and mixed plaque (P= 0.078) or testing duration at 24 hours and 21 days (P= 0.07). Statistically significant differences were noted between all treatment solutions group combinations (P< 0.001), However, there was no difference between 30% Softsoap and Efferdent (P= 0.056).

Comparative evaluation of subgingival scaling and polishing techniques on dental material surface roughness.

PURPOSE: To evaluate and compare the effects of different scaling and polishing techniques on the surface roughness of four different restorative materials. METHODS: 72 specimens were prepared, molded to a size of 8.0 by 2.0 mm, and cured according to the manufacturers' instructions. The specimens were stored at 37°C for 24 hours and then thermocycled for 5,000 cycles (from 55°C to 5°C) to simulate 6 months of clinical use. Surface roughness (Ra/average and Rz/max-overall heights) was calculated using a stylus profilometer by subtracting the simulated treatments of hand scaling, ultrasonic scaling, and air polishing from the baseline measurements. The difference in Ra and Rz data were compared independently for each measurement using a two-way ANOVA on Ranks and the Holm-Sidak test, with α< 0.05 used to determine significance. RESULTS: Irrespective of the scaling or polishing technique employed, flowable bulk fill demonstrated the lowest Ra and Rz values. Hand scaling exhibited the highest roughness and variability among the other techniques, regardless of the materials tested (P< 0.001). Air polishing with glycine resulted in the lowest roughness values across all tested materials, with the exception of the tested bioactive restorative material group. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: Regarding surface roughness, air polishing with glycine may be an effective and safe intervention for periodontal maintenance of subgingival restorations compared to the other tested scaling methods.