4.6 Article

Antimicrobial Impact of Different Air-Polishing Powders in a Subgingival Biofilm Model

期刊

ANTIBIOTICS-BASEL
卷 10, 期 12, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/antibiotics10121464

关键词

air polishing; subgingival; biofilm; trehalose; glycine

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Subgingival air-polishing devices can effectively reduce periopathogenic bacteria, with glycine-based and trehalose-based powders showing significant reductions in bacterial load compared to other treatment groups.
Subgingival air-polishing devices (SAPD) can reduce bacterial biofilms and thus support periodontal healing. The authors of this study evaluated the effectiveness of the glycine-based and trehalose-based air-polishing powders in removing pathogenic bacteria in a subgingival biofilm model. We treated 56 subgingival pockets in porcine jaws with SAPD. Subgingival air polishing was performed in three groups of 13 pockets each: I, glycine-based powder; II, trehalose-based powder; and III, water alone. Another group (IV) served as untreated controls. Prior to air polishing, inoculated titanium bars were inserted into the pockets containing periopathogenic bacteria such as Porphyromonas gingivalis and Tannerella forsythia. Remaining bacteria were evaluated using real-time PCR. The numbers of remaining bacteria depended on the treatment procedure, with the lowest number of total bacteria in group I (median: 1.96 x 10(6) CFU; min: 1.46 x 10(5); max: 9.30 x 10(6)). Both polishing powders in groups I and II (median: 1.36 x 10(7) CFU; min: 5.22 x 10(5); max: 7.50 x 10(7)) showed a statistically significantly lower total bacterial load in comparison to both group IV (median: 2.02 x 10(8) CFU; min: 5.14 x 10(7); max: 4.51 x 10(8); p < 0.05) and group III (median: 4.58 x 10(7) CFU; min: 2.00 x 10(6); max: 3.06 x 10(8); p < 0.05). Both subgingival air-polishing powders investigated can reduce periopathogenic bacteria and thus support antimicrobial therapy approaches in periodontal treatment regimens.

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

4.6
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