4.4 Article

In situ analysis of multispecies biofilm formation on customized titanium surfaces

期刊

MOLECULAR ORAL MICROBIOLOGY
卷 26, 期 4, 页码 241-252

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/j.2041-1014.2011.00610.x

关键词

bacterial adhesion; dental implants; streptococci; surface chemistry; surface roughness

资金

  1. Swedish Dental Society
  2. Hjalmar Svensson Research Foundation
  3. Swedish Research Council
  4. Knowledge Foundation, Sweden

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Many studies to identify surfaces that enhance the incorporation of dental implants into bone and soft-tissue have been undertaken previously. However, to succeed in the clinical situation, an implant surface must not support development of microbial biofilms with a pathogenic potential. As a first step in investigating this, we used two-species and three-species biofilm models with 16S ribosomal RNA fluorescence in situ hybridization and confocal laser scanning microscopy to examine the effect of surface characteristics on biofilm formation by species that can colonize titanium implants in vivo: Streptococcus sanguinis, Actinomyces naeslundii and Lactobacillus salivarius. Surfaces blasted with Al2O3 (S-a = 1.0-2.0 mu m) showed a seven-fold higher bacterial adhesion after 2 h than turned surfaces (S-a = 0.18 mu m) whereas porous surfaces, generated by anodic oxidation (S-a = 0.4 mu m), showed four-fold greater adhesion than turned surfaces. Hence, increased roughness promoted adhesion, most likely through protection of bacteria from shear forces. Chemical modification of the blasted and oxidized surfaces by incorporation of Ca2+ ions reduced adhesion compared with the corresponding non-modified surfaces. After 14 h, biofilm growth occurred in the three-species model but not in the two-species consortium (containing S. sanguinis and A. naeslundii only). The biofilm biovolume on all surfaces was similar, suggesting that the influence of surface characteristics on adhesion was compensated for by biofilm development.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据