The biofilm removal effect of MnO2-diatom microbubbler from the dental prosthetic surfaces: In vitro study

Eun-Hyuk Lee; Yongbeom Seo; Ho-Bum Kwon; Young-Jun Yim; Hyunjoon Kong; Myung-Joo Kim

doi:10.4047/jkap.2020.58.1.14

Journal List > J Korean Acad Prosthodont > v.58(1) > 1142239

Go to TopGo to Top Go to BottomGo to Bottom

TOOLS

Lee, Seo, Kwon, Yim, Kong, and Kim: The biofilm removal effect of MnO2-diatom microbubbler from the dental prosthetic surfaces: In vitro study

Original Article

The Journal of Korean Academy of Prosthodontics 2020; 58(1): 14-22.

Published online: 31 January 2020

DOI: https://doi.org/10.4047/jkap.2020.58.1.14

The biofilm removal effect of MnO₂-diatom microbubbler from the dental prosthetic surfaces: In vitro study

Eun-Hyuk Lee¹

, Yongbeom Seo², Ho-Bum Kwon¹

, Young-Jun Yim¹

, Hyunjoon Kong²

, Myung-Joo Kim¹

¹Department of Prosthodontics, School of Dentistry, Seoul National University, Seoul, Republic of Korea.

²Department of Chemical and Biomolecular Engineering, University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign, Urbana, IL, USA.

Corresponding Author: Myung-Joo Kim. Department of Prosthodontics, School of Dentistry, Seoul National University 101, Daehak-ro, Jongno-gu, Seoul 03080, Republic of Korea. +82 (0)2 2072 2661: silk1@snu.ac.kr

Received 16 September 2019 Revised 1 October 2019 Accepted 7 October 2019

The Korean Academy of Prosthodontics

(open-access):

This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Abstract

Purpose

The aim of this study is to evaluate the effectiveness of MnO₂-diatom microbubbler (DM) on the surface of prosthetic materials as a mouthwash by comparing the biofilm removal effect with those previously used as a mouthwash in dental clinic.

Materials and methods

DM was fabricated by doping manganese dioxide nanosheets to the diatom cylinder surface. Scanning electron microscopy (SEM) was used to observe the morphology of DM and to analyze the composition of doped MnO₂. Stereomicroscope was used to observe the reaction of DM in 3% hydrogen peroxide. Non-precious metal alloys, zirconia and resin specimens were prepared to evaluate the effect of biofilm removal on the surface of prosthetic materials. And then Streptococcus mutans and Porphyromonas gingivalis biofilms were formed on the specimens. When 3% hydrogen peroxide solution and DM were treated on the biofilms, the decontamination effect was compared with chlorhexidine gluconate and 3% hydrogen peroxide solution by crystal violet staining.

Results

Manganese dioxide was found on the surface of the diatom cylinder, and it was found to produce bubble of oxygen gas when added to 3% hydrogen peroxide. For all materials used in the experiments, biofilms of the DM-treated groups got effectively removed compared to the groups used with chlorhexidine gluconate or 3% hydrogen peroxide alone.

Conclusion

MnO₂-diatom microbubbler can remove bacterial membranes on the surface of prosthetic materials more effectively than conventional mouthwashes.

Keywords: Dental plaque, Hydrogen peroxide, MnO₂-diatom microbubbler, Mouthwash, Oral hygiene

Figures and Tables

Fig. 1

Disk specimens used in experiments. (A) 3D stl file designed to produce disk shaped specimens, (B) Polymethyl methacrylate block, (C) Casting wax block, (D) Zirconia block, (E) Polymethyl methacrylate disk, (F) Metal disk, (G) Zirconia disk.

Fig. 2

SEM images of the MnO₂-diatom microbubblers.

Fig. 3

Time-lapse images of the microbubbles. (A) DMs with distilled water (DW) and 3% H₂O₂ solution (× 6.3). (B) DMs with DW and H₂O₂ solution in 1st, 2nd, 3rd and 4th cycles at 2 minute intervals (× 40). Mixing DMs with H₂O₂ solution created a lot of microbubbles at first, but the amount gradually decreased over time. If H₂O₂ solution is added again, microbubbles were generated violently. But the amount decreased as the number of times is repeated.

Fig. 4

Biofilm (P. gingivalis) removal efficiency experiment. (A) Images of remaining biofilms stained with crystal violet after each treatment for 2 min. (B – D) The amount of remaining biofilms on the disks made of metal, zirconia and PMMA after treatments. In all materials, only H₂O₂ + DM group showed significantly lower amount of remaining biofilm compared to PBS group.

Fig. 5

Biofilm (S. mutans) removal efficiency experiment. (A) Images of remaining biofilms stained with crystal violet after each treatment for 2 min. (B – D) The amount of remaining biofilms on the disks made of metal, zirconia and PMMA after treatments. In all materials, only H₂O₂ + DM group showed significantly lower amount of remaining biofilm compared to PBS group.

Table 1

Atomic percentages of MnO₂-diatom microbubblers

DM 1, DM 2 and DM 3 represent three different MnO₂-diatom microbubblers used for atomic percentage analysis.

Table 2

Biofilm (P. gingivalis) removal efficiency experiment tested by Tukey's multiple comparison test

ns: not significant, ^*: P < .05, ^**: P < .01, ^***: P < .005, ^****: P < .0001.

Table 3

Biofilm (S. mutans) removal efficiency experiment tested by Tukey's multiple comparison test

ns: not significant, ^*: P < .05, ^**: P < .01, ^***: P < .005, ^****: P < .0001.

Notes

This study was supported by grant no 01-2019-0013 from the SNUDH Research Fund.

References

1. Thomas JG, Nakaishi LA. Managing the complexity of a dynamic biofilm. J Am Dent Assoc. 2006; 137:10S–15S.

2. Slots J. Subgingival microflora and periodontal disease. J Clin Periodontol. 1979; 6:351–382.

3. Axelsson P, Lindhe J. The effect of a preventive programme on dental plaque, gingivitis and caries in schoolchildren. Results after one and two years. J Clin Periodontol. 1974; 1:126–138.

4. McKendrick AJ, Barbenel MH, McHugh WD. The influence of time of examination, eating, smoking and frequency of brushing on the oral debris index. J Periodontal Res. 1970; 5:205–207.

5. Binney A, Addy M, Newcombe RG. The effect of a number of commercial mouthrinses compared with toothpaste on plaque regrowth. J Periodontol. 1992; 63:839–842.

6. Wu CD, Savitt ED. Evaluation of the safety and efficacy of over-the-counter oral hygiene products for the reduction and control of plaque and gingivitis. Periodontol 2000. 2002; 28:91–105.

7. Gunsolley JC. Clinical efficacy of antimicrobial mouthrinses. J Dent. 2010; 38:S6–S10.

8. Barnett ML. The role of therapeutic antimicrobial mouthrinses in clinical practice: control of supragingival plaque and gingivitis. J Am Dent Assoc. 2003; 134:699–704.

9. Löe H, Schiott CR. The effect of mouthrinses and topical application of chlorhexidine on the development of dental plaque and gingivitis in man. J Periodontal Res. 1970; 5:79–83.

10. Addy M, Jenkins S, Newcombe R. The effect of some chlorhexidine-containing mouthrinses on salivary bacterial counts. J Clin Periodontol. 1991; 18:90–93.

11. Grossman E, Meckel AH, Isaacs RL, Ferretti GA, Sturzenberger OP, Bollmer BW, Moore DJ, Lijana RC, Manhart MD. A clinical comparison of antibacterial mouthrinses: effects of chlorhexidine, phenolics, and sanguinarine on dental plaque and gingivitis. J Periodontol. 1989; 60:435–440.

12. Santos A. Evidence-based control of plaque and gingivitis. J Clin Periodontol. 2003; 30:13–16.

13. Scheie AA. Modes of action of currently known chemical antiplaque agents other than chlorhexidine. J Dent Res. 1989; 68:1609–1616.

14. Haskel E, Esquenasi J, Yussim L. Effects of subgingival chlorhexidine irrigation in chronic moderate periodontitis. J Periodontol. 1986; 57:305–310.

15. Seo Y, Leong J, Park JD, Hong YT, Chu SH, Park C, Kim DH, Deng YH, Dushnov V, Soh J, Rogers S, Yang YY, Kong HJ. Diatom microbubbler for active biofilm removal in confined spaces. ACS Appl Mater Interfaces. 2018; 10:35685–35692.

16. Sánchez MC, Llama-Palacios A, Blanc V, León R, Herrera D, Sanz M. Structure, viability and bacterial kinetics of an in vitro biofilm model using six bacteria from the subgingival microbiota. J Periodontal Res. 2011; 46:252–260.

17. Richmond S, Chestnutt I, Shennan J, Brown R. The relationship of medical and dental factors to perceived general and dental health. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol. 2007; 35:89–97.

18. Locker D, Matear D, Lawrence H. General health status and changes in chewing ability in older canadians over seven years. J Public Health Dent. 2002; 62:70–77.

19. Valderhaug J, Birkeland JM. Periodontal conditions in patients 5 years following insertion of fixed prostheses. Pocket depth and loss of attachment. J Oral Rehabil. 1976; 3:237–243.

20. Yoon JH, Park YB, Oh NS. Analysis of longevity and success rate of fixed, removable, and implant prostheses treated in Korea. J Korean Acad Prosthodont. 2018; 56:95–104.

21. Mandel ID. Chemotherapeutic agents for controlling plaque and gingivitis. J Clin Periodontol. 1988; 15:488–498.

22. Chaves ES, Kornman KS, Manwell MA, Jones AA, Newbold DA, Wood RC. Mechanism of irrigation effects on gingivitis. J Periodontol. 1994; 65:1016–1021.

23. Segreto VA, Collins EM, Beiswanger BB, de La Rosa M, Isaacs RL, Lang NP, Mallatt ME, Meckel AH. A comparison of mouthrinses containing two concentrations of chlorhexidine. J Periodontal Res. 1986; 21:23–32.

24. Grossman E, Reiter G, Sturzenberger OP, De La Rosa M, Dickinson TD, Flrretti GA, Ludlam GE, Meckel AH. Sixmonth study of the effects of a chlorhexidine mouthrinse on gingivitis in adults. J Periodontal Res. 1986; 21:33–43.

25. Badwey JA, Karnovsky ML. Active oxygen species and the functions of phagocytic leukocytes. Annu Rev Biochem. 1980; 49:695–726.

26. Clifford DP, Repine JE. Hydrogen peroxide mediated killing of bacteria. Mol Cell Biochem. 1982; 49:143–149.

27. Brown MR, Gilbert P. Sensitivity of biofilms to antimicrobial agents. J Appl Bacteriol. 1993; 74:87S–97S.

28. Dostie S, Alkadi LT, Owen G, Bi J, Shen Y, Haapasalo M, Larjava HS. Chemotherapeutic decontamination of dental implants colonized by mature multispecies oral biofilm. J Clin Periodontol. 2017; 44:403–409.

29. Ikai H, Nakamura K, Shirato M, Kanno T, Iwasawa A, Sasaki K, Niwano Y, Kohno M. Photolysis of hydrogen peroxide, an effective disinfection system via hydroxyl radical formation. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2010; 54:5086–5091.

30. Wennström JL, Heijl L, Dahlén G, Gröndahl K. Periodic subgingival antimicrobial irrigation of periodontal pockets (I). Clinical observations. J Clin Periodontol. 1987; 14:541–550.

31. Featherstone JD. The science and practice of caries prevention. J Am Dent Assoc. 2000; 131:887–899.

32. Mombelli A. Microbiology and antimicrobial therapy of periimplantitis. Periodontol 2000. 2002; 28:177–189.

33. Potempa J, Sroka A, Imamura T, Travis J. Gingipains, the major cysteine proteinases and virulence factors of Porphyromonas gingivalis: structure, function and assembly of multidomain protein complexes. Curr Protein Pept Sci. 2003; 4:397–407.

34. Ahrari F, Eslami N, Rajabi O, Ghazvini K, Barati S. The antimicrobial sensitivity of Streptococcus mutans and Streptococcus sangius to colloidal solutions of different nanoparticles applied as mouthwashes. Dent Res J (Isfahan). 2015; 12:44–49.

35. Zahradnik RT, Magnusson I, Walker C, McDonell E, Hillman CH, Hillman JD. Preliminary assessment of safety and effectiveness in humans of ProBiora3, a probiotic mouthwash. J Appl Microbiol. 2009; 107:682–690.

TOOLS