IJCM  Vol.10 No.2 , February 2019
Oral Health Status and Gingival Response to Three Different Restorative Materials among Saudi Patients: A Clinical & Histopathological Study
Abstract: Background: The correlation between oral health and dental restoration is fundamental. For the gingival and periodontal tissues to stay healthy, dental restoration should be in regularity with the surrounding tissues. This study aims to assess the oral health status and histopathological gingival response to three different restorative materials among Saudi patients. Methods: The study groups consist of 240 patients (50% males and 50% females), aged 18 - 45, with inclusion and exclusion criteria in the study. Participants are divided into three equal groups: those with composite resin restorations, those with amalgam restorations and those with glass ionomer restorations. Biopsies were taken from adjacent gingival tissues. Clinical parameters were determined by: plaque index (PLI), gingival index (GI) and clinical attachment loss (CAL). All data were collected and evaluated by through statistical analysis. Results: The clinical findings of the current study revealed that amalgam restorations produce a higher means of PLI, GI and CAL compared with composite resin restorations and glass ionomer restorations, but not insignificant levels, except CAL (p = 0.004*). As for histopathological findings, there were significant differences in gingival tissue response to amalgam restorations, composite resin restorations and glass ionomer cement fillings, where there were statistically significant differences in numbers of chronic inflammatory cells (p < 0.001). Conclusion: At the end of the present study, we concluded that the amalgam restorations are less biocompatible compared to composite resin restorations and glass ionomer restorations.
Cite this paper: Al-Abdaly, M. , Al-Harthi, H. , Al-Harthi, S. and Almalki, R. (2019) Oral Health Status and Gingival Response to Three Different Restorative Materials among Saudi Patients: A Clinical & Histopathological Study. International Journal of Clinical Medicine, 10, 78-90. doi: 10.4236/ijcm.2019.102008.

[1]   Bender, I.B. and Seltzer, S. (1972) The Effect of Periodontal Disease on the Pulp. Oral Surgery, Oral Medicine, Oral Pathology, Oral Radiology, 33, 458-474.

[2]   Valderhaug, J. (1980) Periodontal Conditions and Carious Lesions Following the Insertion of Fixed Prostheses: A 10-Year Follow-Up Study. International Dental Journal, 30, 296-304.

[3]   Silness, J. (1970) Periodontal Conditions in Patients Treated with Dental Bridges. Journal of Periodontal Research, 5, 60-68.

[4]   Lang, N.P., Kaarup-Hansen, D., Joss, A., Siegrist, B., Weber, H.P., Gerber, C., et al. (1988) The Significance of Overhanging Filling Margins for the Health Status of Interdental Periodontal Tissues of Young Adults. Schweiz Monatsschr Zahnmed, 98, 725-730.

[5]   Schätzle, M., Land, N.P., Anerud, A., Boysen, H., Burgin, W. and Loe, H. (2001)The Influence of Margins of Restorations of the Periodontal Tissues over 26 Years. Journal of Clinical Periodontology, 28, 57-64.

[6]   Padbury Jr., A., Eber, R. and Wang, H.L. (2003) Interactions between the Gingiva and the Margin of Restorations. Journal of Clinical Periodontology, 30, 379-385.

[7]   Wataha, J.C. (2001) Principles of Biocompatibility for Dental Practitioners. Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry, 86, 203-209.

[8]   Bayne, S.C. and Thompson, G.Y. (2006) Biomaterials. In: Roberson, T.M., Heyman, H.O. and Swift, E.J., Eds., Sturtevant’s Art and Science of Operative Dentistry, 5th Edition, Mosby, St. Louis, 135-242.

[9]   Wennberg, A., Mjör, I.A. and Hensten-Pettersen, A. (1983) Biological Evaluation of Dental Restorative Materials. A Comparison of Different Test Methods. Journal of Biomedical Materials Research, 17, 23-36.

[10]   Larato, D.C. (1972) Influence of a Composite Resin Restoration on the Gingiva. Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry, 28, 402-404.

[11]   Dunkin, R.T. and Chambers, D.W. (1983) Gingival Response to Class V Composite Resin Restorations. JADA, 106, 482-484.

[12]   Skjörland, K.K. (1979) Bacterial Accumulation on Silicate and Composite Materials. Journal de Biologie Buccale, 4, 315-322.

[13]   Skjørland, K.K. and Sønju, T. (1982) Effect of Sucrose Rinses on Bacterial Colonization on Amalgam and Composite. Acta Odontologica Scandinavica, 40, 193-196.

[14]   Dummer, P.M. and Harrison, K.A. (1982) In Vitro Plaque Formation on Commonly Used Dental Materials. Journal of Oral Rehabilitation, 9, 413-417.

[15]   McHugh, W.D. (1992) Statement: Effects and Side Effects of Dental Restorative Materials. Advances in Dental Research, 6, 139-144.

[16]   Lorscheider, F.L., Vimy, M.J. and Summers, A.O. (1995) Mercuryexposure from “Silver” Tooth Firings: Emerging Evidence Questions a Traditional Dental Paradigm. The FASEB Journal, 9, 504-508.

[17]   Mount, G.J. (2002) Color Atlas of Glass Ionomer Cement. 2nd Edition, Martin Dunitz, London.

[18]   Sasanaluckit, P., Albustany, K.R., Doherty, P.J. and Williams, D.F. (1993) Biocompatibility of Glass Ionomer Cements. Biomaterials, 14, 906-916.

[19]   Geurtsen, W., Spahl, W. and Leyhausen, G. (1998) Residualmonomer/Additive Release and Variability in Cytotoxicity of Light-Cured Glass-Ionomer Cements and Compomers. Journal of Dental Research, 77, 2012-2019.

[20]   Craig, R.G. and Powers, J.M. (2002) Restorative Dental Materials. 11th Edition, Mosby Pub., London, 126-142.

[21]   Silness, J. and Loe, H. (1964) Periodontal Disease in Pregnancy II. Correlation between Oral Hygiene and Periodontal Condition. Acta Odontologica Scandinavica, 22, 122-135.

[22]   Loe, H. and Silness, J. (1963) Periodontal Disease in Pregnancy I. Prevalence and Severity. Acta Odontologica Scandinavica, 21, 533-551.

[23]   Yaltirik, M., Ozbas, H., Bilgic, B. and Issever, H. (2004) Reactions of Connective Tissue to Mineral Trioxide Aggregate and Amalgam. Journal of Endodontics, 30, 95-99.

[24]   Bader, J.D., Rozier, R.G., McFall, W.T. and Ramsey, D.L. (1991) Effect of Crown Margins on Periodontal Conditions in Regularly Attending Patients. The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry, 65, 75-79.

[25]   Leyhausen, G., Abtahi, M., Karbakhsch, M., Sapotnick, A. and Geurtsen, W. (1998) Biocompatibility of Various Light-Curing and One Conventional Glass-Ionomer Cement. Biomaterials, 19, 559-564.

[26]   Murray, P.E., García-Godoy, C. and García-Godoy, F. (2007) How Is the Biocompatibility of Dental Biomaterials Evaluated? Medicina Oral Patologia Oral y Cirugia Bucal, 12, 258-266.

[27]   De Araujo, M.A., Araújo, R.M. and Marsilio, A.L. (1998) A Retrospective Look at Esthetic Resin Composite and Glass-Ionomer Class III Restorations: A 2-Year Clinical Evaluation. Quintessence International, 29, 87-93.

[28]   Gilmore, N. and Sheiham, A. (1971) Overhanging Dental Restorations and Periodontai Disease. Journal of Periodontology, 42, 8-12.

[29]   Leon, A.R. (1976) Amalgam Restorations and Periodontai Disease. British Dental Journal, 140, 377-382.

[30]   App, G.R. (1961) Effect of Silicate, Amalgam, and Cast Gold on the Gingiva. Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry, 11, 522-532.

[31]   Trott, I. and Sherkat, A. (1964) Effect of Class II Amalgam Restorations on Health of the Gingiva: A Clinical Survey. Journal of the Canadian Dental Association, 30, 766-770.

[32]   Van Dijken, J.W.V. and Sjostrom, S. (1991) The Effect of Glass Ionomer Cement and Resin Composite Fillings on Marginal Gingiva. Journal of Clinical Periodontology, 18, 200-203.

[33]   Hamilton, I.R. and Bowden, G. (1988) Effect of Fluoride on Oral Microorganisms. In: Ekstrand, J., Fejerskov, O. and Silverstone, L.M., Eds., Fluoride in Dentistry, Munksgaard, Copenhagen, 77-103.

[34]   Scherer, W., Lippman, N. and Kain, J. (1989) Antimicrobial Properties of Glass-Ionomer Cements and Other Restorative Materials. Operative Dentistry, 14, 77-81.

[35]   Swift, E.J. (1989) In Vitro Caries-Inhibitory Properties of a Silver Cermet. Journal of Dental Research, 68, 1088-1093.

[36]   Peumans, M., Van Meerbeek, B., Lambrechts, P., Vanherle, G. and Quirynen, M. (1998) The Influence of Direct Composite Additions for the Correction of Tooth form and/or Position on Periodontal Health. A Retrospective Study. Journal of Periodontology, 69, 422-427.

[37]   Padbury Jr., A., Eber, R. and Wang, H.L. (2003) Interactions between the Gingival and the Margin of Restorations. Journal of Clinical Periodontology, 30, 379-385.

[38]   Paolantonio, M., D’ercole, S., Perinetti, G., Tripodi, D., Catamo, G., Serra, E., et al. (2004) Clinical and Microbiological Effects of Different Restorative Materials on the Periodontal Tissues Adjacent to Subgingival Class V Restorations. Journal of Clinical Periodontology, 31, 200-207.

[39]   Geurtsen, W. (1998) Substances Released from Dental Resin Composites and Glass Ionomer Cements. European Journal of Oral Sciences, 106, 687-695.

[40]   Geurtsen, W. (2000) Biocompatibility of Resin-Modified Filling Materials. Critical Reviews in Oral Biology and Medicine, 11, 333-355.

[41]   Liu, J., Lei, D., Waalkes, M.P., Beliles, R.P. and Morgan, D.L. (2003) Genomic Analysis of the Rat Lung Following Gelemental Mercury Vapor Exposure. Toxicological Sciences, 74, 174-181.

[42]   Ziff, M.F. (1992) Documented Clinical Side Effects to Dental Amalgam. Advances in Dental Research, 6, 131-134.

[43]   Hany Mohamed, A.A., Nor Shamsuria, O., Norhayati, L., Rajan, S. and Deepti, S. (2011) Cytotoxicity Evaluation of a New Fast Set Highly Viscous Conventional Glass Ionomer Cement with L929 Fibroblast Cell Line. Journal of Conservative Dentistry, 14, 406-408.