ORAL HEALTH EVIDENCE-BASED PRACTICE PROGRAM
View the CAT printer-friendly / share this CAT
spacer
Title MDPB-Containing Bonding Agents Offer Short-Term Inhibition of Bacterial Growth
Clinical Question For bonded restorations, does an MDPB-containing bonding agent inhibit bacterial growth and secondary caries formation at the tooth/restorative interface when compared to the control?
Clinical Bottom Line MDPB-containing bonding agents can provide some short-term inhibition of bacterial growth. The positive charge of MDPB attracts the negative charge of bacterial cell walls and leads to lysis and cell death. MDPB-containing bonding agent Clearfil Protect Bond (Kurarey Co. Ltd, Japan) also contains fluoride, which may decrease demineralization at the restorative interface. However, due to a lack of higher evidence at this time and the small difference in the antimicrobial effect that may explain the contradicting published results, recommendations concerning clinical effectiveness regarding the reduction of secondary caries formation cannot be made.
Best Evidence (you may view more info by clicking on the PubMed ID link)
PubMed ID Author / Year Patient Group Study type
(level of evidence)
#1) 26345999Cocco/201523 studiesSystematic review of non-randomized trials
Key results23 studies (20 in vitro, 2 in vivo, 1 in situ) regarding 12-methacryloyloxy dodecypyridinium bromide (MDPB) incorporation into bonding agents showed an antibacterial effect against Streptococcus and Lactobacillus species.
#2) 25095833Vasconcelos/201410 patientsIn situ Comparative Study
Key results10 volunteers wore palatal devices with composite bonded to sterilized human enamel samples. Restorations were bonded using All-Bond SE self-etching control or Clearfil Protect Bond, a fluoride and MDPB self-etching bonding agent. Specimens were worn for 14 days, with sucrose application 8x/day simulating a high caries risk environment. Total streptococci, Mutans streptococci and lactobacilli were recorded. Although Clearfil Protect Bond demonstrated fewer colony-forming units for total streptococci and lactobacilli, no significant difference was found between the different samples. Potential for secondary caries formation was measured using microhardness. No significant difference was noted between samples, suggesting that none of the bonding agents was effective in inhibiting demineralization and secondary caries formation.
#3) 26201229Pinto/201517 patientsIn situ Comparative Study
Key resultsRestorations were bonded using Clearfil Protect Bond or One-up Bond F Plus to sterilized bovine enamel and dentin and mounted on palatal stents. 17 volunteers used palatal stents for 14 days simulating a high caries risk environment. Sucrose was applied to the samples 8x/day. Total streptococci, Mutans streptococci and lactobacilli were recorded. Results showed the Clearfil Protect Bond had less Mutans streptococci and total streptococci, and less depth of penetration of secondary caries when compared to One-up Bond F Plus. Neither bonding agent prevented bacterial colonization or eliminated the loss of mineral content at the tooth restorative interface, although less demineralization was seen with Clearfil Protect Bond.
Evidence Search MDPB[All Fields]; MDPB[All Fields] AND Clinical Trial[ptyp]
Comments on
The Evidence
Validity: Cocco et al. detected moderate to high bias in the mostly in vitro studies reviewed concerning antimicrobial effectiveness for MDPB. The conclusions drawn from these evaluations are only useful for short-term evaluation of antimicrobial activity. The two crossover in situ studies provide a closer approximation to a clinical situation. Both studies were similar in design. Vasconcelos et al. used human enamel under poor oral hygiene conditions. Pinto et al. used bovine enamel and dentin under a similar environment. Both evaluated bacterial biofilm content and demineralization at the restorative margin. Perspective: Although the antimicrobial properties of MDPB-containing Clearfil Protect Bond have been well established in vitro, Vasconcelos et al. found that, under in situ conditions, there was no significant difference between bonding agents in bacterial inhibition of streptococcal species and demineralization at the restorative margin. The results from the double-blinded study by Pinto el al. differed in that Clearfil Protect Bond out-performed One-up Bond F Plus by inhibiting the extent of demineralization insult at the restorative margin and the amount of streptococcal species in plaque. It did not, however, out-perform One-up Bond F Plus in the inhibition of lactobacillus. Overall, the bacterial acidic insult resulting from a high caries risk environment may negate the antibacterial potential of the MDPB bonding agent. A more clinically relevant outcome may be seen in the moderate or high caries risk patient who is motivated to control caries risk factors.
Applicability Clearfil Protect Bond (Kurarey Co., Ltd Japan) is the only commercially available bonding agent that incorporates MDPB. An antimicrobial effect at the tooth restoration interface has been demonstrated in vitro and in situ. This, along with improved diet and oral hygiene habits, may improve the longevity of bonded restorations and reduce the frequency of replacement and overall cost of dental care for the high caries risk patient. However, clinical trials are needed to test the effectiveness of MDPB-containing bonding agents in reducing secondary caries formation in this population.
Specialty/Discipline (General Dentistry) (Prosthodontics) (Restorative Dentistry)
Keywords Antimicrobial bonding agent, MDPB, high caries risk
ID# 2928
Date of submission: 10/16/2015spacer
E-mail LEES14@livemail.uthscsa.edu
Author Spencer Lee, DDS
Co-author(s)
Co-author(s) e-mail
Faculty mentor/Co-author Kyumin Whang, PhD
Faculty mentor/Co-author e-mail WHANG@uthscsa.edu
Basic Science Rationale
(Mechanisms that may account for and/or explain the clinical question, i.e. is the answer to the clinical question consistent with basic biological, physical and/or behavioral science principles, laws and research?)
post a rationale
None available
spacer
Comments on the CAT
(FOR PRACTICING DENTISTS' and/or FACULTY COMMENTS ON PUBLISHED CATs)
post a comment
None available
spacer

Return to Found CATs list