Comparison of staining potential of silver diamine fluoride versus silver diamine fluoride and potassium iodide under tooth-colored restorations: An in vitro study.

BACKGROUND: Silver diamine fluoride (SDF) is one of the effectual cariostatic agents widely used in minimal intervention dentistry. However, the major drawback of SDF is dark staining after its application. AIM: In the present study, the staining of 38% SDF alone and 38% SDF and potassium iodide (KI) was compared after restoration with glass-ionomer cement (GIC) and resin composite using ImageJ software. METHODS AND MATERIAL: Forty extracted carious primary teeth were sorted into four groups. In Group I and II, SDF was applied and restored with GIC and composite restorations, respectively. In Group III and IV, SDF application was followed by KI and restored with GIC and composite restorations, respectively. Images were captured after initial applications on day 1 and day 14 after restoration. The captured images were imported to ImageJ software and mean gray values were calculated. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: The mean gray values obtained were subjected to statistical analysis using paired t-test and independent sample t-test. There was statistically significant if P < 0.05. RESULTS: Following the application of SDF and RIVA STAR, the baseline mean gray values showed no statistical significance. On day 1, the mean gray values were highest in Group IV (208.30) and lowest in Group I (178.51). Similarly, on day 14, the highest mean gray values were observed in Group IV (208.45) and lowest in Group I (147.6) which were statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS: The restorations after SDF application attained dark stain eventually, whereas with the application of SDF followed by KI (RIVA STAR), the restorations showed the least staining.

Comparative evaluation of antimicrobial efficacy of glass ionomer cement added with propolis, chitosan, and chlorhexidine against Streptococcus mutans and Lactobacillus acidophilus: An in vitro study.

CONTEXT: Glass ionomer cement (GIC) is known for its antimicrobial activity due to its low pH and fluoride release. The fluoride released has an inhibitory effect on a finite number of bacteria which leads to the risk of recurrent caries. Additives such as chlorhexidine (CHX) and triclosan have been tried to maximize the antibacterial activity of GIC. Although CHX is known for its impressive antimicrobial action, it has adverse after effects which include alteration of commensal oral flora, staining of teeth, etc., Hence, there is a need for a material with improved antimicrobial efficacy with nominal side effects. AIM: The aim of this study is to assess the antimicrobial efficacy of conventional GIC added with Propolis, Chitosan (CH), and CHX against Streptococcus mutans and Lactobacillus acidophilus. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Eighty discs of size 10 × 2 mm are prepared with Conventional GIC and GIC added with Propolis, CH and CHX (n = 10) and tested against S. mutans and L. acidophilus using the agar diffusion assay. Zones of inhibition are measured for day 1, 7, and 14, and the data were tabulated and analyzed. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: One-way ANOVA test for intragroup and Tukey's post hoc test for intergroup comparison. RESULTS: The mean value of zone of inhibition (in mm) against S. mutans on day 14 for Group I, II, III, and IV are 11.70 ± 1.49, 16.50 ± 2.23, 19.30 ± 2.87, and 15.60 ± 2.76, respectively. For L. acidophilus, the mean value of the zone of inhibition (in mm) on day 14 are 8.40 ± 0.97, 9.70 ± 0.68, 16.20 ± 2.04, and 12.50 ± 0.97 for Group I, II, III, and IV, respectively. CONCLUSION: Higher antimicrobial activity was shown by GIC with CHX against both strains. GIC with Propolis and GIC with CH were effective in inhibiting S. mutans and L. acidophilus, respectively.