Sharma Madhurima, Bhatia Taniya, Sharma Rohit, Nandan Rohit
Prosthodontics, Teerthanker Mahaveer Dental College and Research Centre, Moradabad, IND.
Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, Teerthanker Mahaveer Dental College and Research Centre, Moradabad, IND.
Cureus. 2024 Dec 6;16(12):e75215. doi: 10.7759/cureus.75215. eCollection 2024 Dec.
Introduction The cushion effect of soft liners serves to distribute the mastication forces and stresses more evenly, along with absorbing energy. Instead, soft liners can act as a nidus for microbial growth, especially Candida species. An accumulation of these fungi is a problem encountered during the clinical use of them, especially in immunocompromised individuals. This study aimed to evaluate and compare the antifungal activity of soft liners when combined with posaconazole and voriconazole. Methods For this study, one soft liner and two antifungal drugs were used. Before testing, drugs were incorporated in a soft liner, and discs were made that were allowed to be immersed in distilled water. Three groups of five samples each were used to categorize the specimens: groups I, II, and III were GC soft liner, GC soft liner + posaconazole, and GC soft liner + voriconazole, respectively. These samples were assessed for antifungal activity on the 1st, 10th, and 20th day. For antifungal activity, the zone of growth inhibition was measured. Results A statistically significant difference in zone of growth inhibition across three groups was observed. Group II had the highest zone of inhibition, followed by group III and group I, which had the least. In intragroup comparisons over different time intervals, statistically significant variations were observed; day 20 had the highest zone of inhibition, followed by day 10 and day 1. Conclusion Significant changes were seen in the antifungal properties of posaconazole and voriconazole with the soft liner. Posaconazole in soft liners showed a significantly higher zone of growth inhibition than the other two groups.
引言 软衬垫的缓冲作用有助于更均匀地分布咀嚼力和应力,同时吸收能量。相反,软衬垫可能成为微生物生长的病灶,尤其是念珠菌属。这些真菌的积聚是临床使用软衬垫时遇到的一个问题,特别是在免疫功能低下的个体中。本研究旨在评估和比较软衬垫与泊沙康唑和伏立康唑联合使用时的抗真菌活性。
方法 本研究使用了一种软衬垫和两种抗真菌药物。在测试前,将药物掺入软衬垫中,制成圆盘并使其浸入蒸馏水中。每组五个样本,共三组,分别为:第一组、第二组和第三组分别为GC软衬垫、GC软衬垫+泊沙康唑、GC软衬垫+伏立康唑。在第1天、第10天和第20天对这些样本进行抗真菌活性评估。对于抗真菌活性,测量生长抑制圈。
结果 观察到三组之间生长抑制圈存在统计学显著差异。第二组的抑制圈最大,其次是第三组,第一组最小。在不同时间间隔的组内比较中,观察到统计学显著差异;第20天的抑制圈最高,其次是第10天和第1天。
结论 泊沙康唑和伏立康唑与软衬垫联合使用时,其抗真菌特性发生了显著变化。软衬垫中的泊沙康唑显示出比其他两组显著更高的生长抑制圈。