Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

In vitro study of surface properties and microbial adhesion of various dental polymers fabricated by different manufacturing techniques after thermocycling

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Clinical Oral Investigations Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Objectives

The study aims to investigate surface properties and microbial adhesion of various dental polymers fabricated by different manufacturing techniques before and after thermocycling.

Materials and methods

The following six materials were used to fabricate disk-shaped specimens: conventional denture polymer (Vertex Acrylic Resin, VAR), CAD/CAM denture polymer (Organic PMMA eco Pink, OP), conventional temporary polymer (Protemp™ 4, PT), CAD/CAM temporary polymer (Die Material, DM), conventional denture framework polymer (BioHPP, PB), and CAD/CAM denture framework polymer (breCAM.BioHPP, CB). The specimens were tested before and after thermocycling (5000 and 10,000 cycles, 5 °C/55 °C). Surface roughness (SR), hydrophobicity, and surface topography were determined by profilometry, water contact angle, and scanning electron microscopy (SEM). Then specimens were incubated with Staphylococcus aureus, Streptococcus mutans, and Candida albicans for 24 h, respectively. Microbial adhesion was assessed using colony-forming unit counts, XTT assay, and SEM.

Results

SR and hydrophobicity of VAR group were higher than that of OP group. S. aureus and C. albicans adhesion on VAR and PT groups were higher than that on OP and DM groups, respectively. There was no difference in surface properties and microbial adhesion between PB and CB groups. After thermocycling, SR (expect OP group) of all materials increased and hydrophobicity decreased, and the amount and activity of S. aureus and C. albicans adhesion also increased. The adhesion of S. aureus and C. albicans showed a moderate positive correlation with SR, independent of hydrophobicity.

Conclusions

CAD/CAM denture polymers and temporary polymers showed less S. aureus and C. albicans adhesion when compared to conventional ones, which were mainly affected by surface roughness, independent of hydrophobicity. Thermocycling could increase surface roughness, decrease hydrophobicity, and affect microbial adhesion of the materials.

Clinical significance

CAD/CAM dental polymers may be a better choice for the manufacture of temporary restorations and dentures to reduce microbial adhesion.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Liebermann A, Wimmer T, Schmidlin PR, Scherer H, Loffler P, Roos M, Stawarczyk B (2016) Physicomechanical characterization of polyetheretherketone and current esthetic dental CAD/CAM polymers after aging in different storage media. J Prosthet Dent 115(3):321–328. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2015.09.004

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Zoidis P, Papathanasiou I, Polyzois G (2016) The use of a modified poly-ether-ether-ketone (PEEK) as an alternative framework material for removable dental prostheses. A clinical report. J Prosthodont 25(7):580–584. https://doi.org/10.1111/jopr.12325

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Skirbutis G, Dzingute A, Masiliunaite V, Sulcaite G, Zilinskas J (2018) PEEK polymer’s properties and its use in prosthodontics. A review. Stomatologija 20(2):54–58

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Bilgin MS, Baytaroglu EN, Erdem A, Dilber E (2016) A review of computer-aided design/computer-aided manufacture techniques for removable denture fabrication. Eur J Dent 10(2):286–291. https://doi.org/10.4103/1305-7456.178304

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  5. Lee S, Hong SJ, Paek J, Pae A, Kwon KR, Noh K (2019) Comparing accuracy of denture bases fabricated by injection molding, CAD/CAM milling, and rapid prototyping method. J Adv Prosthodont 11(1):55–64. https://doi.org/10.4047/jap.2019.11.1.55

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  6. Al-Dwairi ZN, Tahboub KY, Baba NZ, Goodacre CJ (2020) A comparison of the flexural and impact strengths and flexural modulus of CAD/CAM and conventional heat-cured polymethyl methacrylate (PMMA). J Prosthodont 29(4):341–349. https://doi.org/10.1111/jopr.12926

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Aguirre BC, Chen JH, Kontogiorgos ED, Murchison DF, Nagy WW (2020) Flexural strength of denture base acrylic resins processed by conventional and CAD-CAM methods. J Prosthet Dent 123(4):641–646. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2019.03.010

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Steinmassl O, Dumfahrt H, Grunert I, Steinmassl PA (2018) Influence of CAD/CAM fabrication on denture surface properties. J Oral Rehabil 45(5):406–413. https://doi.org/10.1111/joor.12621

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Murat S, Alp G, Alatali C, Uzun M (2019) In vitro evaluation of adhesion of Candida albicans on CAD/CAM PMMA-based polymers. J Prosthodont 28(2):e873–e879. https://doi.org/10.1111/jopr.12942

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Rayyan MM, Aboushelib M, Sayed NM, Ibrahim A, Jimbo R (2015) Comparison of interim restorations fabricated by CAD/CAM with those fabricated manually. J Prosthet Dent 114(3):414–419. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2015.03.007

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Kalberer N, Mehl A, Schimmel M, Muller F, Srinivasan M (2019) CAD-CAM milled versus rapidly prototyped (3D-printed) complete dentures: an in vitro evaluation of trueness. J Prosthet Dent 121(4):637–643. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2018.09.001

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Busscher HJ, Rinastiti M, Siswomihardjo W, van der Mei HC (2010) Biofilm formation on dental restorative and implant materials. J Dent Res 89(7):657–665. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022034510368644

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Monteiro DR, de Souza Batista VE, Caldeirao ACM, Jacinto RC, Pessan JP (2021) Oral prosthetic microbiology: aspects related to the oral microbiome, surface properties, and strategies for controlling biofilms. Biofouling 37(4):353–371. https://doi.org/10.1080/08927014.2021.1912741

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Gad MM, Fouda SM, Abualsaud R, Al-Shahrani F, Al-Thobity AM, Khan SQ, Akhtar S, Ateeq IS, Helal MA, Al-Harbi FA (2021) Strength and surface properties of a 3D-printed denture base polymer. J Prosthodont. https://doi.org/10.1111/jopr.13413

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Hampe R, Lumkemann N, Sener B, Stawarczyk B (2018) The effect of artificial aging on Martens hardness and indentation modulus of different dental CAD/CAM restorative materials. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater 86:191–198. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmbbm.2018.06.028

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Vasiliu RD, Porojan SD, Birdeanu MI, Porojan L (2020) Effect of thermocycling, surface treatments and microstructure on the optical properties and roughness of CAD-CAM and heat-pressed glass ceramics. Materials (Basel) 13(2):381. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma13020381

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Al-Fouzan AF, Al-Mejrad LA, Albarrag AM (2017) Adherence of Candida to complete denture surfaces in vitro: a comparison of conventional and CAD/CAM complete dentures. J Adv Prosthodont 9(5):402–408. https://doi.org/10.4047/jap.2017.9.5.402

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  18. Meirowitz A, Rahmanov A, Shlomo E, Zelikman H, Dolev E, Sterer N (2021) Effect of denture base fabrication technique on Candida albicans adhesion in vitro. Materials (Basel) 14(1):221. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma14010221

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Zoidis P, Papathanasiou I (2016) Modified PEEK resin-bonded fixed dental prosthesis as an interim restoration after implant placement. J Prosthet Dent 116(5):637–641. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2016.04.024

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Xing X, Hu Q, Liu Y, Wang Y, Cheng H (2022) Comparative analysis of the surface properties and corrosion resistance of Co-Cr dental alloys fabricated by different methods. J Prosthet Dent 127(3):497 e1-497 e11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2021.11.019

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Cai Z, Li Y, Wang Y, Chen S, Jiang S, Ge H, Lei L, Huang X (2019) Antimicrobial effects of photodynamic therapy with antiseptics on Staphylococcus aureus biofilm on titanium surface. Photodiagnosis Photodyn Ther 25:382–388. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pdpdt.2019.01.024

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Cai Z, Li Y, Wang Y, Chen S, Jiang S, Ge H, Lei L, Huang X (2019) Disinfect Porphyromonas gingivalis biofilm on titanium surface with combined application of chlorhexidine and antimicrobial photodynamic therapy. Photochem Photobiol 95(3):839–845. https://doi.org/10.1111/php.13060

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Schmalz G, Cieplik F (2021) Biofilms on restorative materials. Monogr Oral Sci 29:155–194. https://doi.org/10.1159/000510191

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Hao Y, Huang X, Zhou X, Li M, Ren B, Peng X, Cheng L (2018) Influence of dental prosthesis and restorative materials interface on oral biofilms. Int J Mol Sci 19(10):3157. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms19103157

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  25. Song F, Koo H, Ren D (2015) Effects of material properties on bacterial adhesion and biofilm formation. J Dent Res 94(8):1027–1034. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022034515587690

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Sterzenbach T, Helbig R, Hannig C, Hannig M (2020) Bioadhesion in the oral cavity and approaches for biofilm management by surface modifications. Clin Oral Investig 24(12):4237–4260. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-020-03646-1

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  27. Al-Dwairi ZN, Tahboub KY, Baba NZ, Goodacre CJ, Ozcan M (2019) A comparison of the surface properties of CAD/CAM and conventional polymethylmethacrylate (PMMA). J Prosthodont 28(4):452–457. https://doi.org/10.1111/jopr.13033

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Atalay S, Çakmak G, Fonseca M, Schimmel M, Yilmaz B (2021) Effect of thermocycling on the surface properties of CAD-CAM denture base materials after different surface treatments. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater 121:104646. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmbbm.2021.104646

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Liber-Knec A, Lagan S (2021) Surface testing of dental biomaterials—determination of contact angle and surface free energy. Materials (Basel) 14(11):2716. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma14112716

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Yuan C, Wang X, Gao X, Chen F, Liang X, Li D (2016) Effects of surface properties of polymer-based restorative materials on early adhesion of Streptococcus mutans in vitro. J Dent 54:33–40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdent.2016.07.010

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Hahnel S, Rosentritt M, Handel G, Burgers R (2009) In vitro evaluation of artificial ageing on surface properties and early Candida albicans adhesion to prosthetic resins. J Mater Sci Mater Med 20(1):249–255. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10856-008-3570-7

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Ozel GS, Guneser MB, Inan O, Eldeniz AU (2017) Evaluation of C. albicans and S. mutans adherence on different provisional crown materials. J Adv Prosthodont 9(5):335–340. https://doi.org/10.4047/jap.2017.9.5.335

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  33. Schubert A, Bürgers R, Baum F, Kurbad O, Wassmann T (2021) Influence of the manufacturing method on the adhesion of Candida albicans and Streptococcus mutans to oral splint resins. Polymers 13(10):1534. https://doi.org/10.3390/polym13101534

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  34. Lemos JA, Palmer SR, Zeng L, Wen ZT, Kajfasz JK, Freires IA, Abranches J, Brady LJ (2019) The biology of Streptococcus mutans. Microbiol Spectr 7(1):10. https://doi.org/10.1128/microbiolspec.GPP3-0051-2018

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Mayer FL, Wilson D, Hube B (2013) Candida albicans pathogenicity mechanisms. Virulence 4(2):119–128. https://doi.org/10.4161/viru.22913

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  36. Marsh P, Moter A (2000) Devine D (2011) Dental plaque biofilms: communities, conflict and control. Periodontol 55(1):16–35. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0757.2009.00339.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Lamont RJ, Koo H, Hajishengallis G (2018) The oral microbiota: dynamic communities and host interactions. Nat Rev Microbiol 16(12):745–759. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41579-018-0089-x

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We would like to express our sincere thanks to all those who have helped us in the course of our writing this paper.

Funding

This work was supported by Science and Technology Innovation Joint Project of Fujian Province (grant number 2018Y9103) and Startup Fund for Scientific Research, Fujian Medical University (grant number 2020QH2048).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Fujian Key Laboratory of Oral Diseases & Fujian Provincial Engineering Research Center of Oral Biomaterial & Stomatological Key Lab of Fujian College and University, School and Hospital of Stomatology, Fujian Medical University, 88 Jiaotong Road, Fuzhou, 350004, Fujian, China

    Xia Wei, Linjuan Gao, Kun Wu & Hui Cheng

  2. Institute of Stomatology & Research Center of Dental Esthetics and Biomechanics, School and Hospital of Stomatology, Fujian Medical University, 246 Yangqiao Zhong Road, Fuzhou, 350002, Fujian, China

    Yu Pan, Lei Jiang, Honglei Lin, Yinghui Wang & Hui Cheng

Authors
  1. Xia Wei
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Linjuan Gao
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Kun Wu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Yu Pan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Lei Jiang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Honglei Lin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Yinghui Wang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Hui Cheng
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

Conceptualization: Xia Wei, Linjuan Gao, Kun Wu, Yu Pan, Lei Jiang, Honglei Lin, Yinghui Wang, Hui Cheng; methodology: Xia Wei, Linjuan Gao, Kun Wu, Yu Pan, Lei Jiang, Honglei Lin, Yinghui Wang, Hui Cheng; formal analysis and investigation: Xia Wei, Linjuan Gao, Kun Wu; writing — review and editing: Xia Wei, Yu Pan; funding acquisition: Xia Wei, Hui Cheng; supervision: Yu Pan, Lei Jiang, Honglei Lin, Yinghui Wang, Hui Cheng.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Hui Cheng.

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval

For this type of study, ethics approval is not required.

Informed consent

For this type of study, formal consent is not required.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher's note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Information

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary file1 (DOCX 22 KB)

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Wei, X., Gao, L., Wu, K. et al. In vitro study of surface properties and microbial adhesion of various dental polymers fabricated by different manufacturing techniques after thermocycling. Clin Oral Invest 26, 7287–7297 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-022-04689-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-022-04689-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation