4.8 Article

Antibacterial activity of particulate Bioglass® against supra- and subgingival bacteria

期刊

BIOMATERIALS
卷 22, 期 12, 页码 1683-1687

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/S0142-9612(00)00330-6

关键词

bioactive glass; implant; periodontal; antibacterial

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Particulate Bioglass(R) is a bioactive material used in the repair of periodontal defects. This material undergoes a series of surface reactions in an aqueous environment which lead to osseointegration. The aim of this study was to determine whether these reactions exerted an antibacterial effect on a range of oral bacteria. Streptococcus sanguis. Streptococcus mutans and Actinomyces viscosus were suspended in nutrient broth (NB), artificial saliva (AS) or Dulbecco's modified eagle medium plus 10% foetal calf serum (DMEM + 10% FCS), with or without particulate Bioglass(R). Ail bacteria showed reduced viability following exposure to Bioglass(R) in all the media after 1 h. This antibacterial effect increased after 3 h. Porphyromonas gingivalis, Fusobacterium nucleatum, Prevotella intermedia and Actinobacillus actinomycetemcomitans were suspended in either BM broth or 40% horse serum (HS) in RPMI. A considerable reduction in viability was observed with all bacteria tested, in both media, compared to inert glass controls. In further experiments it was found that the viability of S. sanguis was significantly reduced following exposure to NB pre-incubated with Bioglass(R). Additionally, it was found that neutralisation of this highly alkaline solution eliminated the antibacterial effect. Moreover, a solution of NB and NaOH (of equivalent pH) exerted an antibacterial effect of similar magnitude to that of the solution pre-incubated with Bioglass(R). Thus, particulate Bioglass(R) exerts an antibacterial effect on certain oral bacteria, possibly by virtue of the alkaline nature of its surface reactions. This may reduce bacterial colonisation of its surface in vivo. (C) 2001 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.

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

4.8
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