肉桂醛抗菌粘接剂的制备及其抗菌性能评价

doi:10.13481/j.1671-587X.20210506

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 目的

制备一种含肉桂醛的抗菌牙本质粘接剂，并对粘接剂的抗菌性能、体外细胞毒性和即刻粘接性能进行评价。

方法

选择变异链球菌进行实验。以微量肉汤稀释法测定肉桂醛的最小抑菌浓度（MIC）和最小杀菌浓度（MBC）。将肉桂醛以质量分数2%、4%、6%和8%的比例加入商品粘接剂Single Bond 2（SB2）中均匀混合制备抗菌粘接剂，以SB2作为对照组，制备试件。试件与细菌共培养，平板菌落计数法测定试件表面细菌黏附数量并计算抗菌率；对试件表面黏附的细菌进行细菌活/死细菌染色实验，观察试件表面黏附细菌状态。试件与细胞培养液共同孵育24 h制备浸提液，采用MTT法测定粘接剂的体外细胞毒性，评价其细胞毒性等级。在此基础上，选取有明显抗菌性能的实验组，采用微拉伸实验测定粘接剂的微拉伸强度，评价其即刻粘接性能。

结果

肉桂醛的MIC和MBC均为250 mg·L^－1，肉桂醛具有良好的抗菌效果。肉桂醛的质量分数为4%、6%和8%时，粘接剂的抗菌率均高于99%。体外细胞毒性实验，在相同的稀释倍数下，与对照组比较，抗菌粘接剂的细胞毒性等级均未升高。微拉伸实验，依据抗菌实验的结果，选取质量分数4%、6%和8%肉桂醛组进行实验，与对照组比较，质量分数4%、6%和8%肉桂醛组微拉伸强度差异无统计学意义（P>0.05）。

结论

肉桂醛具有良好的抗菌性能；在商品粘接剂SB2中，肉桂醛的质量分数高于4%时，抗菌粘接剂具有明显的抗菌性能，其体外细胞毒性和即刻粘接性能未受影响。

关键词: 肉桂醛, 粘接剂, 抗菌性能, 体外细胞毒性, 微拉伸强度

Abstract: Objective

To prepare a antibacterial dentin adhesive containing cinnamaldehyde， and to evaluate the antibacterial properties， in vitro cytotoxicity and instant adhesive properties of the adhesive.

Methods

The Streptococcus mutans were selected for experiment. The minimum inhibitory concentration （MIC） and minimum bactericidal concentration （MBC） of cinnamaldehyde were determined by the micro broth dilution method. Cinnamaldehyde was added to the commercial adhesive Single Bond 2（SB2） in the mass fractions of 2%， 4%， 6%， and 8% to prepare the antibacterial adhesive. The commercial adhesive SB2 was used as control groups； the specimens were prepared and they were co-cultured with the bacteria. The plate colony counting method was used to determine the number of bacteria attached to the surface of the specimens and the antibacterial rates were calculated； the bacteria attached to the surface of the specimens were subjected to live/dead bacterial staining experiments to observe the state of bacteria attached to the surface of the specimens. The adhesive was incubated with the cell culture solution for 24 h to prepare the extract. The MTT method was used to determine the in vitro cytotoxicity of the adhesive and its cytotoxicity level was evaluated. On this basis， an experimental group with significant antibacterial properties was selected， and the micro-tensile test was used to measure the micro-tensile strength of the adhesive and evaluate its immediate adhesive performance.

Results

The MIC and MBC of cinnamaldehyde were both 250 mg·L^－1， and cinnamaldehyde had a good antibacterial effect； when the mass fractions of cinnamaldehyde were 4%， 6% and 8%， the antibacterial rates of the adhesive were all higher than 99%. In the in vitro cytotoxicity experiment， under the same dilution ratio， compared with control group， the cytotoxicity level of the antimicrobial adhesive did not change significantly. According to the results of the antibacterial experiment， 4%， 6%， and 8% cinnamaldehyde groups were selected for the micro-tensile experiment. Compared with control group，the micro-tensile strengths in 4%，6% and 8% cinnamaldehyde groups had no statistically significant differences（P>0.05）.

Conclusion

Cinnamaldehyde has good antibacterial properties； when the mass fraction of cinnamaldehyde in the commercial adhesive SB2 is higher than 4%， the antibacterial adhesive has significant antibacterial properties， and its in vitro cytotoxicity and immediate bonding properties are not affected.

Key words: cinnamaldehyde, adhesive, antibacterial property, in vitro cytotoxicity, micro-tensile strength

中图分类号:

R783.1

王晗,田子璐,朱轩言,杨宇斌,朱松. 肉桂醛抗菌粘接剂的制备及其抗菌性能评价[J]. 吉林大学学报(医学版), 2021, 47(5): 1116-1123.

Han WANG,Zilu TIAN,Xuanyan ZHU,Yubin YANG,Song ZHU. Preparation of cinnamaldehyde antibacterial adhesive and evaluation on its antibacterial property[J]. Journal of Jilin University(Medicine Edition), 2021, 47(5): 1116-1123.

图/表 3

表1

各组粘接剂菌落计数和抗菌率 (n=5)"

Group	Colony counting ( $x ˉ$ ±s)	Aantibacterial rate（η/%）
Control	752.80±15.25	0.00
Cinnamaldenhyde
2%	632.60±24.72^*	15.97
4%	6.00±0.71^*△	99.20
6%	1.00±0.71^*△	99.87
8%	0.40±0.54^*△	99.95

表1

图1

表2

参考文献 29

1	SU M X， YAO S Y， GU L S， et al. Antibacterial effect and bond strength of a modified dental adhesive containing the peptide nisin［J］. Peptides， 2018， 99： 189-194.
2	CHRYSANTHAKOPOULOS N A. Placement， replacement and longevity of composite resin-based restorations in permanent teeth in Greece［J］. Int Dent J， 2012， 62（3）： 161-166.
3	ZHANG N， MELO M A， BAI Y， et al. Novel protein-repellent dental adhesive containing 2-methacryloyloxyethyl phosphorylcholine［J］. J Dent， 2014， 42（10）： 1284-1291.
4	ZHANG N， ZHANG K， WEIR M D， et al. Effects of water-aging for 6 months on the durability of a novel antimicrobial and protein-repellent dental bonding agent［J］. Int J Oral Sci， 2018， 10（2）： 18.
5	许晓虎，戴杏竹，赵望泓. 纳米防龋材料的研究进展［J］. 口腔疾病防治， 2018， 26（7）： 472-476.
6	BOUTSIOUKI C， FRANKENBERGER R， LÜCKER S， et al. Inhibition of secondary caries in vitro by addition of chlorhexidine to adhesive components［J］. Dent Mater， 2019， 35（3）： 422-433.
7	MACHADO A H S， GARCIA I M， MOTTA A S D， et al. Triclosan-loaded chitosan as antibacterial agent for adhesive resin［J］. J Dent， 2019， 83： 33-39.
8	FEITOSA S A， PALASUK J， KAMOCKI K， et al. Doxycycline-encapsulated nanotube-modified dentin adhesives［J］. J Dent Res， 2014， 93（12）： 1270-1276.
9	DELAVIZ Y， LIU T W， DEONARAIN A R， et al. Physical properties and cytotoxicity of antimicrobial dental resin adhesives containing dimethacrylate oligomers of Ciprofloxacin and Metronidazole［J］. Dent Mater， 2019， 35（2）： 229-243.
10	陈慧，程磊. 防龋粘接材料的研究进展［J］. 国际口腔医学杂志， 2017， 44（1）： 92-97.
11	NABAVI S M， MARCHESE A， IZADI M， et al. Plants belonging to the genus Thymus as antibacterial agents： from farm to pharmacy［J］. Food Chem， 2015， 173： 339-347.
12	NABAVI S F， DI LORENZO A， IZADI M， et al. Antibacterial effects of cinnamon： from farm to food， cosmetic and pharmaceutical industries［J］. Nutrients， 2015， 7（9）： 7729-7748.
13	COCCO A R， ROSA W L， SILVA A F， et al. A systematic review about antibacterial monomers used in dental adhesive systems： Current status and further prospects［J］. Dent Mater， 2015， 31（11）： 1345-1362.
14	ESTEBAN FLOREZ F L， HIERS R D， LARSON P， et al. Antibacterial dental adhesive resins containing nitrogen-doped titanium dioxide nanoparticles［J］. Mater Sci Eng C Mater Biol Appl， 2018， 93： 931-943.
15	YAN H Y， WANG S L， HAN L， et al. Chlorhexidine-encapsulated mesoporous silica-modified dentin adhesive［J］. J Dent， 2018， 78：83-90.
16	GUO X， CHENG Q， YU G， et al. The functions of hydrophobic elastic polyurethane combined with an antibacterial triclosan derivative in the dentin restoration interface［J］. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater， 2020， 102： 103471.
17	SHREAZ S， WANI W A， BEHBEHANI J M，et al. Cinnamaldehyde and its derivatives， a novel class of antifungal agents［J］. Fitoterapia， 2016， 112： 116-131.
18	中华人民共和国国家卫生和计划生育委员会. 食品安全国家标准食品添加剂使用标准：［S］. 北京：中国标准出版社， 2015.
19	HE T F， WANG L H， NIU D B， et al. Cinnamaldehyde inhibit Escherichia coli associated with membrane disruption and oxidative damage［J］. Arch Microbiol， 2019， 201（4）： 451-458.
20	ELGAMILY H， SAFY R， MAKHARITA R. Influence of medicinal plant extracts on the growth of oral pathogens Streptococcus mutans and Lactobacillus acidophilus： an In-vitro study［J］. Open Access Maced J Med Sci， 2019， 7（14）： 2328-2334.
21	HE T F， ZHANG Z H， ZENG X A， et al. Determination of membrane disruption and genomic DNA binding of cinnamaldehyde to Escherichia coli by use of microbiological and spectroscopic techniques［J］. J Photochem Photobiol B， 2018， 178： 623-630.
22	LIU S， HOU Y， LIU W， et al. Components of the calcium-calcineurin signaling pathway in fungal cells and their potential as antifungal targets［J］. Eukaryot Cell， 2015， 14（4）： 324-334.
23	WANG S Y， CHEN P F， CHANG S T. Antifungal activities of essential oils and their constituents from indigenous cinnamon （Cinnamomum osmophloeum） leaves against wood decay fungi［J］. Bioresour Technol， 2005， 96（7）： 813-818.
24	FILHO J G， VIZOTO N L， LUIZA DE AGUIAR LOESCH M， et al. Genetic and physiological effects of subinhibitory concentrations of oral antimicrobial agents on Streptococcus mutans biofilms［J］. Microb Pathog， 2021， 150： 104669.
25	SONG Y M， ZHOU H Y， WU Y， et al. In vitro evaluation of the antibacterial properties of tea tree oil on planktonic and biofilm-forming Streptococcus mutans ［J］. AAPS PharmSciTech， 2020， 21（6）： 227.
26	AKHLAGHI N， SADEGHI M， FAZELI F， et al. The antibacterial effects of coffee extract， chlorhexidine， and fluoride against Streptococcus mutans and Lactobacillus plantarum： an in vitro study［J］. Dent Res J （Isfahan）， 2019， 16（5）： 346-353.
27	MARTINS M L， LEITE K L F， PACHECO-FILHO E F， et al. Efficacy of red propolis hydro-alcoholic extract in controlling Streptococcus mutans biofilm build-up and dental enamel demineralization［J］. Arch Oral Biol， 2018， 93： 56-65.
28	LI F， CHEN J， CHAI Z， et al. Effects of a dental adhesive incorporating antibacterial monomer on the growth， adherence and membrane integrity of Streptococcus mutans［J］. J Dent，2009，37（4）： 289-296.
29	GONG H， GUO X， CAO D， et al. Photopolymerizable and moisture-curable polyurethanes for dental adhesive applications to increase restoration durability［J］. J Mater Chem B， 2019， 7（5）： 744-754.

Group	Cell survival rate（η/%）			Cytotoxicity grade
Group	1 000 times	2 000 times	4 000 times	1 000 times	2 000 times	4 000 times
Control	70.49	95.25	99.68	2	1	1
Cinnamaldenhyde
2%	79.32	114.93	113.93	1	0	0
4%	75.16	95.60	96.89	1	1	1
6%	75.41	104.13	108.91	1	0	0
8%	72.55	99.22	108.58	2	1	0

[1]	闫琳琳,朱琳,赵远航,宋嘉卓,邹馨颖,刘新,赵红,张志民,张红. 二氧化钛纳米粒子联合LED光照射对口腔变异链球菌的抑制作用及其机制[J]. 吉林大学学报(医学版), 2022, 48(4): 929-937.
[2]	张晓萌, 王惠敏, 杨宇斌, 朱轩言, 田子璐, 朱松. 可光固化聚氨酯粘接剂的制备及其对传统丙烯酸树脂粘接剂性能的影响[J]. 吉林大学学报(医学版), 2020, 46(02): 365-371.
[3]	牟胤赫, 杨陆一, 吴嫣然, 滕蓉, 夏小雪, 宁磊, 王守东. 不同条件下3种正畸粘接剂粘结强度的比较及其意义[J]. 吉林大学学报(医学版), 2016, 42(03): 512-516.
[4]	张晓燕，李正强，孙莹，王冠勋，郑璐,韩冰. 丝素蛋白/左旋聚乳酸复合组织工程纳米材料的生物相容性及安全性评价[J]. 吉林大学学报(医学版), 2014, 40(03): 578-582.