5 research outputs found

    In vivo biofilm formation on stainless steel bonded retainers during different oral health-care regimens

    Get PDF
    Retention wires permanently bonded to the anterior teeth are used after orthodontic treatment to prevent the teeth from relapsing to pre-treatment positions. A disadvantage of bonded retainers is biofilm accumulation on the wires, which produces a higher incidence of gingival recession, increased pocket depth and bleeding on probing. This study compares in vivo biofilm formation on single-strand and multi-strand retention wires with different oral health-care regimens. Two-centimetre wires were placed in brackets that were bonded to the buccal side of the first molars and second premolars in the upper arches of 22 volunteers. Volunteers used a selected toothpaste with or without the additional use of a mouthrinse containing essential oils. Brushing was performed manually. Regimens were maintained for 1 week, after which the wires were removed and the oral biofilm was collected to quantify the number of organisms and their viability, determine the microbial composition and visualize the bacteria by electron microscopy. A 6-week washout period was employed between regimens. Biofilm formation was reduced on single-strand wires compared with multi-strand wires; bacteria were observed to adhere between the strands. The use of antibacterial toothpastes marginally reduced the amount of biofilm on both wire types, but significantly reduced the viability of the biofilm organisms. Additional use of the mouthrinse did not result in significant changes in biofilm amount or viability. However, major shifts in biofilm composition were induced by combining a stannous fluoride- or triclosan-containing toothpaste with the mouthrinse. These shifts can be tentatively attributed to small changes in bacterial cell surface hydrophobicity after the adsorption of the toothpaste components, which stimulate bacterial adhesion to the hydrophobic oil, as illustrated for a Streptococcus mutans strain

    Stress relaxation analysis facilitates a quantitative approach towards antimicrobial penetration into biofilms

    Get PDF
    Biofilm-related infections can develop everywhere in the human body and are rarely cleared by the host immune system. Moreover, biofilms are often tolerant to antimicrobials, due to a combination of inherent properties of bacteria in their adhering, biofilm mode of growth and poor physical penetration of antimicrobials through biofilms. Current understanding of biofilm recalcitrance toward antimicrobial penetration is based on qualitative descriptions of biofilms. Here we hypothesize that stress relaxation of biofilms will relate with antimicrobial penetration. Stress relaxation analysis of single-species oral biofilms grown in vitro identified a fast, intermediate and slow response to an induced deformation, corresponding with outflow of water and extracellular polymeric substances, and bacterial re-arrangement, respectively. Penetration of chlorhexidine into these biofilms increased with increasing relative importance of the slow and decreasing importance of the fast relaxation element. Involvement of slow relaxation elements suggests that biofilm structures allowing extensive bacterial re-arrangement after deformation are more open, allowing better antimicrobial penetration. Involvement of fast relaxation elements suggests that water dilutes the antimicrobial upon penetration to an ineffective concentration in deeper layers of the biofilm. Next, we collected biofilms formed in intra-oral collection devices bonded to the buccal surfaces of the maxillary first molars of human volunteers. Ex situ chlorhexidine penetration into two weeks old in vivo formed biofilms followed a similar dependence on the importance of the fast and slow relaxation elements as observed for in vitro formed biofilms. This study demonstrates that biofilm properties can be derived that quantitatively explain antimicrobial penetration into a biofilm

    Orthodontic treatment with fixed appliances and biofilm formation-a potential public health threat?

    No full text
    OBJECTIVES: Orthodontic treatment is highly popular for restoring functional and facial esthetics in juveniles and adults. As a downside, prevalence of biofilm-related complications is high. Objectives of this review are to (1) identify special features of biofilm formation in orthodontic patients and (2) emphasize the need for strong concerted action to prevent biofilm-related complications during orthodontic treatment. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Literature on biofilm formation in the oral cavity is reviewed to identify special features of biofilm formation in orthodontic patients. Estimates are made of juvenile and adult orthodontic patient population sizes, and biofilm-related complication rates are used to indicate the costs and clinical workload resulting from biofilm-related complications. RESULTS: Biofilm formation in orthodontic patients is governed by similar mechanisms as common in the oral cavity. However, orthodontic appliances hamper the maintenance of oral hygiene and provide numerous additional surfaces, with properties alien to the oral cavity, to which bacteria can adhere and form a biofilm. Biofilm formation may lead to gingivitis and white spot lesions, compromising facial esthetics. Whereas gingivitis after orthodontic treatment is often transient, white spot lesions may turn into cavities requiring professional restoration. Complications requiring professional care develop in 15 % of all orthodontic patients, implying an annual cost of over US$500,000,000 and a workload of 1,000 full-time dentists in the USA alone. CONCLUSIONS: Improved preventive measures and antimicrobial materials are urgently required to prevent biofilm-related complications of orthodontic treatment from overshadowing its functional and esthetic advantages. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: High treatment demand and occurrence of biofilm-related complications requiring professional care make orthodontic treatment a potential public health threat

    Synergy of brushing mode and antibacterial use on in vivo biofilm formation

    No full text
    Objectives: Orthodontic, multi-strand retention-wires are used as a generalized model for oral retention sites to investigate whether biofilm left-behind after powered toothbrushing in-vivo enabled better penetration of antibacterials as compared with manual brushing. Methods: 2-cm multi-strand, stainless-steel retention-wires were placed in brackets bonded bilaterally in the upper arches of 10-volunteers. Volunteers used NaF-sodium-lauryl-sulphate-containing toothpaste and antibacterial, triclosan-containing toothpaste supplemented or not with an essential-oils containing mouthrinse. Opposite sides of the dentition including the retention-wires, were brushed manually or with a powered toothbrush. Health-care-regimens were maintained for 1-week, after which wires were removed and oral biofilm was collected. Results: When powered toothbrushing was applied, slightly less bacteria were collected than after manual brushing, regardless whether an antibacterial-regimen was used or not. Powered-toothbrushing combined with antibacterial-regimens yielded lower biofilm viability than manual brushing, indicating better antibacterial penetration into biofilm left-behind after powered brushing. Major shifts in biofilm composition, with a decrease in prevalence of both cariogenic species and periodontopathogens, were induced after powered brushing using an antibacterial-regimen. Conclusion: Oral biofilm left-behind after powered brushing in-vivo enabled better penetration of antibacterials than after manual brushing. Clinical significance: Mechanical removal of oral biofilm is important for prevention of dental pathologies, but biofilm is always left-behind, such as in fissures, buccal pits, interproximal areas and gingival margins and around orthodontic appliances. Use of antibacterial toothpastes or mouthrinses can contribute to removal or killing of biofilm bacteria, but biofilm structure hampers antibacterial penetration. A synergy between brushing mode and antibacterial-regimen applied exists with clinically demonstrable effects. (C) 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved

    Biofilm formation on stainless steel and gold wires for bonded retainers in vitro and in vivo and their susceptibility to oral antimicrobials

    No full text
    <p>Bonded retainers are used in orthodontics to maintain treatment result. Retention wires are prone to biofilm formation and cause gingival recession, bleeding on probing and increased pocket depths near bonded retainers. In this study, we compare in vitro and in vivo biofilm formation on different wires used for bonded retainers and the susceptibility of in vitro biofilms to oral antimicrobials.</p><p>Orthodontic wires were exposed to saliva, and in vitro biofilm formation was evaluated using plate counting and live/dead staining, together with effects of exposure to toothpaste slurry alone or followed by antimicrobial mouthrinse application. Wires were also placed intra-orally for 72 h in human volunteers and undisturbed biofilm formation was compared by plate counting and live/dead staining, as well as by denaturing gradient gel electrophoresis for compositional differences in biofilms.</p><p>Single-strand wires attracted only slightly less biofilm in vitro than multi-strand wires. Biofilms on stainless steel single-strand wires however, were much more susceptible to antimicrobials from toothpaste slurries and mouthrinses than on single-strand gold wires and biofilms on multi-strand wires. Also, in vivo significantly less biofilm was found on single-strand than on multi-strand wires. Microbial composition of biofilms was more dependent on the volunteer involved than on wire type.</p><p>Biofilms on single-strand stainless steel wires attract less biofilm in vitro and are more susceptible to antimicrobials than on multi-strand wires. Also in vivo, single-strand wires attract less biofilm than multi-strand ones.</p><p>Use of single-strand wires is preferred over multi-strand wires, not because they attract less biofilm, but because biofilms on single-strand wires are not protected against antimicrobials as in crevices and niches as on multi-strand wires.</p>
    corecore