THE EFFECT OF BIOACTIVE RESTORATIVE MATERIALS ON ORAL MICROBIOME AND GINGIVAL HEALTH: A CROSS-SECTIONAL STUDY
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.33279/jkcd.v16i02.895Keywords:
Bioactive restorative materials, Gingivitis, SensitivityAbstract
Objectives: The current study objective was to compare the oral microbiota diversity of patients with bioactive restorations verses traditional materials restorations.
Materials and Methods: The current study comprised patients who visited the institution's operative dentistry and had various restorations (such as conventional composites, fluoride-releasing composites, and bioactive glass). Saliva and plaque samples were used to gather data for the microbiome study (16S rRNA sequencing). The inflammation was asses by useing periodontal probing and gingival index.
Results: The greatest benefits were seen by bioactive glass restorations, with decreased inflammation, improved gingival health (gingival index: 1.2 ± 0.3), and decreased cariogenic bacteria (↓40%). Comparing fluoride-releasing composites to conventional composites, the former showed superior periodontal health and a moderate reduction in germs (± 25%). More sensitivity (35%) and pain (40%), higher pathogenic bacterial load, poorer gingival scores (2.1 ± 0.5), and deeper periodontal probing depths (3.5 ± 0.6 mm) were resulted from conventional composites.
Conclusion: The strongest beneficial effects were shown by bioactive materials, with decreased inflammation, enhanced gingival health, and decreased cariogenic bacteria. Higher bacterial loads, more gingival irritation, and deeper periodontal probing depths were seen in conventional composites.
References
Abouelleil H, Attik N, Chiriac R, Toche F, Ory A, Zayakh A, et al. Comparative study of two bioactive dental materials. Dental Materials. 2024;40(2):297–306.
Ibrahim MS, Aldhafeeri FR, Banaemah AS, Alhaider MS, Al-Dulaijan YA, Balhaddad AA. The demineralization resistance and mechanical assessments of different bioactive restorative materials for primary and permanent teeth: an in vitro study. BDJ open. 2024;10(1):30.
Ferracane JL. A historical perspective on dental composite restorative materials. Journal of Functional Biomaterials. 2024;15(7):173.
El-Gaaly AN, Hassan RR, Shaalan OO. Clinical evaluation of new bioactive restorative material versus resin modified glass ionomer in restoration of cervical carious lesions: Randomized clinical trial. Advanced Dental Journal. 2024;6(2):339–49.
Justen M, Scheck D, Münchow EA, Jardim JJ. Is Cention-N comparable to other direct dental restorative materials? A systematic review with network meta-analysis of in vitro studies. Dental Materials. 2024.
Ibrahim H, Aziz AA, Yahya N, Yap A. Surface degradation of ion-releasing restorative materials with cariogenic challenge. Operative Dentistry. 2024;49(2):178–88.
Schmalz G, Schwendicke F, Hickel R, Platt JA. Alternative direct restorative materials for dental amalgam: A concise review based on an FDI policy statement. international dental journal. 2024;74(4):661–8.
Sunanda YL, Parvathaneni KP, Raju T, Seshadri A, Dondapati GD. Effect of blood and artificial saliva contamination on marginal adaptation and sealing ability of different retrograde filling materials: A comparative analysis. Journal of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics. 2024;27(7):743–9.
Schmalz G, Hickel R, Price RB, Platt JA. Bioactivity of dental restorative materials: FDI policy statement. international dental journal. 2023;73(1):21–7.
Spagnuolo G. Bioactive dental materials: the current status. Materials. 2022;15(6):2016.
Simila HO, Boccaccini AR. Sol-gel bioactive glass containing biomaterials for restorative dentistry: A review. Dental Materials. 2022;38(5):725–47.
Darvell BW, Smith AJ. Inert to bioactive–a multidimensional spectrum. Dental Materials. 2022;38(1):2–6.
Estrela C, Cintra LTA, Duarte MAH, Rossi-Fedele G, Gavini G, Sousa-Neto MD. Mechanism of action of bioactive endodontic materials. Brazilian dental journal. 2023;34(1):1–11.
Par M, Gubler A, Attin T, Tarle Z, Tauböck TT. Anti-demineralizing protective effects on enamel identified in experimental and commercial restorative materials with functional fillers. Scientific reports. 2021;11(1):11806.
de Mendonça BC, Soto‐Montero JR, de Castro EF, Pecorari VGA, Rueggeberg FA, Giannini M. Flexural strength and microhardness of bulk‐fill restorative materials. Journal of Esthetic and Restorative Dentistry. 2021;33(4):628–35.
Singer L, Fouda A, Bourauel C. Biomimetic approaches and materials in restorative and regenerative dentistry. BMC oral health. 2023;23(1):105.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Asmat Ullah, Muhammad Zeeshan, Zartashia Arooj, Zudia Riaz, Fahad Ashfaq, Atta Elahi
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
You are free to:
- Share — copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format
- Adapt — remix, transform, and build upon the material
- The licensor cannot revoke these freedoms as long as you follow the license terms.
Under the following terms:
- Attribution — You must give appropriate credit , provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made . You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use.
- NonCommercial — You may not use the material for commercial purposes .
- No additional restrictions — You may not apply legal terms or technological measures that legally restrict others from doing anything the license permits.
