Journal of Periodontal and Implant Science

Korean Academy of Periodontology (대한치주과학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Comparison of periodontitis-associated oral biofilm formation under dynamic and static conditions

  • Song, Won sub (Department of Periodontology and Research Institute of Oral Sciences, Gangneung-Wonju National University College of Dentistry) ;
  • Lee, Jae-Kwan (Department of Periodontology and Research Institute of Oral Sciences, Gangneung-Wonju National University College of Dentistry) ;
  • Park, Se Hwan (Department of Periodontology and Research Institute of Oral Sciences, Gangneung-Wonju National University College of Dentistry) ;
  • Um, Heung-Sik (Department of Periodontology and Research Institute of Oral Sciences, Gangneung-Wonju National University College of Dentistry) ;
  • Lee, Si Young (Department of Microbiology and Immunology and Research Institute of Oral Sciences, Gangneung-Wonju National University College of Dentistry) ;
  • Chang, Beom-Seok (Department of Periodontology and Research Institute of Oral Sciences, Gangneung-Wonju National University College of Dentistry)
  • Received : 2017.06.12
  • Accepted : 2017.07.14
  • Published : 2017.08.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to compare the characteristics of single- and dualspecies in vitro oral biofilms made by static and dynamic methods. Methods: Hydroxyapatite (HA) disks, 12.7 mm in diameter and 3 mm thick, were coated with processed saliva for 4 hours. The disks were divided into a static method group and a dynamic method group. The disks treated with a static method were cultured in 12-well plates, and the disks in the dynamic method group were cultured in a Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) biofilm reactor for 72 hours. In the single- and dual-species biofilms, Fusobacterium nucleatum and Porphyromonas gingivalis were used, and the amount of adhering bacteria, proportions of species, and bacterial reduction of chlorhexidine were examined. Bacterial adhesion was examined with scanning electron microscopy (SEM) and confocal laser scanning microscopy (CLSM). Results: Compared with the biofilms made using the static method, the biofilms made using the dynamic method had significantly lower amounts of adhering and looser bacterial accumulation in SEM and CLSM images. The proportion of P. gingivalis was higher in the dynamic method group than in the static method group; however, the difference was not statistically significant. Furthermore, the biofilm thickness and bacterial reduction by chlorhexidine showed no significant differences between the 2 methods. Conclusions: When used to reproduce periodontal biofilms composed of F. nucleatum and P. gingivalis, the dynamic method (CDC biofilm reactor) formed looser biofilms containing fewer bacteria than the well plate. However, this difference did not influence the thickness of the biofilms or the activity of chlorhexidine. Therefore, both methods are useful for mimicking periodontitis-associated oral biofilms.

Keywords

References

  1. Costerton JW, Stewart PS, Greenberg EP. Bacterial biofilms: a common cause of persistent infections. Science 1999;284:1318-22. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.284.5418.1318
  2. Hall-Stoodley L, Costerton JW, Stoodley P. Bacterial biofilms: from the natural environment to infectious diseases. Nat Rev Microbiol 2004;2:95-108. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrmicro821
  3. Filoche S, Wong L, Sissons CH. Oral biofilms: emerging concepts in microbial ecology. J Dent Res 2010;89:8-18. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022034509351812
  4. Kolenbrander PE, Andersen RN, Blehert DS, Egland PG, Foster JS, Palmer RJ Jr. Communication among oral bacteria. Microbiol Mol Biol Rev 2002;66:486-505. https://doi.org/10.1128/MMBR.66.3.486-505.2002
  5. Ximenez-Fyvie LA, Haffajee AD, Socransky SS. Comparison of the microbiota of supra- and subgingival plaque in health and periodontitis. J Clin Periodontol 2000;27:648-57. https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-051x.2000.027009648.x
  6. Paster BJ, Boches SK, Galvin JL, Ericson RE, Lau CN, Levanos VA, et al. Bacterial diversity in human subgingival plaque. J Bacteriol 2001;183:3770-83. https://doi.org/10.1128/JB.183.12.3770-3783.2001
  7. Blanc V, Isabal S, Sanchez MC, Llama-Palacios A, Herrera D, Sanz M, et al. Characterization and application of a flow system for in vitro multispecies oral biofilm formation. J Periodontal Res 2014;49:323-32. https://doi.org/10.1111/jre.12110
  8. Park JH, Lee JK, Um HS, Chang BS, Lee SY. A periodontitis-associated multispecies model of an oral biofilm. J Periodontal Implant Sci 2014;44:79-84. https://doi.org/10.5051/jpis.2014.44.2.79
  9. Walker C, Sedlacek MJ. An in vitro biofilm model of subgingival plaque. Oral Microbiol Immunol 2007;22:152-61. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1399-302X.2007.00336.x
  10. Guggenheim B, Giertsen E, Schupbach P, Shapiro S. Validation of an in vitro biofilm model of supragingival plaque. J Dent Res 2001;80:363-70. https://doi.org/10.1177/00220345010800011201
  11. Thomas WE, Trintchina E, Forero M, Vogel V, Sokurenko EV. Bacterial adhesion to target cells enhanced by shear force. Cell 2002;109:913-23. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0092-8674(02)00796-1
  12. Ding AM, Palmer RJ Jr, Cisar JO, Kolenbrander PE. Shear-enhanced oral microbial adhesion. Appl Environ Microbiol 2010;76:1294-7. https://doi.org/10.1128/AEM.02083-09
  13. Goeres DM, Loetterle LR, Hamilton MA, Murga R, Kirby DW, Donlan RM. Statistical assessment of a laboratory method for growing biofilms. Microbiology 2005;151:757-62. https://doi.org/10.1099/mic.0.27709-0
  14. Rudney JD, Chen R, Lenton P, Li J, Li Y, Jones RS, et al. A reproducible oral microcosm biofilm model for testing dental materials. J Appl Microbiol 2012;113:1540-53. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2672.2012.05439.x
  15. Saunders KA, Greenman J. The formation of mixed culture biofilms of oral species along a gradient of shear stress. J Appl Microbiol 2000;89:564-72. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2672.2000.01148.x
  16. Haffajee AD, Socransky SS. Microbial etiological agents of destructive periodontal diseases. Periodontol 2000 1994;5:78-111. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0757.1994.tb00020.x
  17. Okuda T, Kokubu E, Kawana T, Saito A, Okuda K, Ishihara K. Synergy in biofilm formation between Fusobacterium nucleatum and Prevotella species. Anaerobe 2012;18:110-6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anaerobe.2011.09.003
  18. Fonseca AP, Sousa JC. Effect of shear stress on growth, adhesion and biofilm formation of Pseudomonas aeruginosa with antibiotic-induced morphological changes. Int J Antimicrob Agents 2007;30:236-41. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijantimicag.2007.04.011
  19. Cotter JJ, O'Gara JP, Stewart PS, Pitts B, Casey E. Characterization of a modified rotating disk reactor for the cultivation of Staphylococcus epidermidis biofilm. J Appl Microbiol 2010;109:2105-17. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2672.2010.04842.x
  20. Saito Y, Fujii R, Nakagawa KI, Kuramitsu HK, Okuda K, Ishihara K. Stimulation of Fusobacterium nucleatum biofilm formation by Porphyromonas gingivalis. Oral Microbiol Immunol 2008;23:1-6.
  21. Abiko Y, Sato T, Mayanagi G, Takahashi N. Profiling of subgingival plaque biofilm microflora from periodontally healthy subjects and from subjects with periodontitis using quantitative real-time PCR. J Periodontal Res 2010;45:389-95. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0765.2009.01250.x
  22. Loozen G, Ozcelik O, Boon N, De Mol A, Schoen C, Quirynen M, et al. Inter-bacterial correlations in subgingival biofilms: a large-scale survey. J Clin Periodontol 2014;41:1-10. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcpe.12167
  23. Shaddox LM, Alfant B, Tobler J, Walker C. Perpetuation of subgingival biofilms in an in vitro model. Mol Oral Microbiol 2010;25:81-7. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2041-1014.2009.00549.x
  24. Fraud S, Maillard JY, Kaminski MA, Hanlon GW. Activity of amine oxide against biofilms of Streptococcus mutans: a potential biocide for oral care formulations. J Antimicrob Chemother 2005;56:672-7. https://doi.org/10.1093/jac/dki325
  25. Hope CK, Petrie A, Wilson M. In vitro assessment of the plaque-removing ability of hydrodynamic shear forces produced beyond the bristles by 2 electric toothbrushes. J Periodontol 2003;74:1017-22. https://doi.org/10.1902/jop.2003.74.7.1017
  26. Thurnheer T, Gmur R, Guggenheim B. Multiplex FISH analysis of a six-species bacterial biofilm. J Microbiol Methods 2004;56:37-47. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mimet.2003.09.003
  27. Pratten J, Wills K, Barnett P, Wilson M. In vitro studies of the effect of antiseptic-containing mouthwashes on the formation and viability of Streptococcus sanguis biofilms. J Appl Microbiol 1998;84:1149-55. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2672.1998.00462.x
  28. Du LD, Kolenbrander PE. Identification of saliva-regulated genes of Streptococcus gordonii DL1 by differential display using random arbitrarily primed PCR. Infect Immun 2000;68:4834-7. https://doi.org/10.1128/IAI.68.8.4834-4837.2000
  29. Ahn SJ, Kho HS, Lee SW, Nahm DS. Roles of salivary proteins in the adherence of oral streptococci to various orthodontic brackets. J Dent Res 2002;81:411-5. https://doi.org/10.1177/154405910208100611
  30. Morris EJ, McBride BC. Adherence of Streptococcus sanguis to saliva-coated hydroxyapatite: evidence for two binding sites. Infect Immun 1984;43:656-63.
  31. Lamont RJ, El-Sabaeny A, Park Y, Cook GS, Costerton JW, Demuth DR. Role of the Streptococcus gordonii SspB protein in the development of Porphyromonas gingivalis biofilms on streptococcal substrates. Microbiology 2002;148:1627-36. https://doi.org/10.1099/00221287-148-6-1627
  32. Maeda K, Nagata H, Yamamoto Y, Tanaka M, Tanaka J, Minamino N, et al. Glyceraldehyde-3-phosphate dehydrogenase of Streptococcus oralis functions as a coadhesin for Porphyromonas gingivalis major fimbriae. Infect Immun 2004;72:1341-8. https://doi.org/10.1128/IAI.72.3.1341-1348.2004
  33. Kaplan CW, Lux R, Haake SK, Shi W. The Fusobacterium nucleatum outer membrane protein RadD is an arginine-inhibitable adhesin required for inter-species adherence and the structured architecture of multispecies biofilm. Mol Microbiol 2009;71:35-47. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2958.2008.06503.x

Cited by

  1. Antibacterial, Hydrophilic Effect and Mechanical Properties of Orthodontic Resin Coated with UV-Responsive Photocatalyst vol.11, pp.6, 2017, https://doi.org/10.3390/ma11060889
  2. At the Interface of Materials and Microbiology: A Call for the Development of Standardized Approaches to Assay Biomaterial-Biofilm Interactions vol.98, pp.8, 2017, https://doi.org/10.1177/0022034519854685
  3. Antimicrobial effect of toothbrush with light emitting diode on dental biofilm attached to zirconia surface: an in vitro study vol.35, pp.3, 2017, https://doi.org/10.14368/jdras.2019.35.3.160
  4. Interaction between Lactobacillus reuteri and periodontopathogenic bacteria using in vitro and in vivo (G. mellonella) approaches vol.78, pp.8, 2017, https://doi.org/10.1093/femspd/ftaa044
  5. Implication of Surface Properties, Bacterial Motility, and Hydrodynamic Conditions on Bacterial Surface Sensing and Their Initial Adhesion vol.9, pp.None, 2017, https://doi.org/10.3389/fbioe.2021.643722
  6. Relevance of Biofilm Models in Periodontal Research: From Static to Dynamic Systems vol.9, pp.2, 2017, https://doi.org/10.3390/microorganisms9020428
  7. Operational culture conditions determinate benzalkonium chloride resistance in L. monocytogenes-E. coli dual species biofilms vol.360, pp.None, 2017, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijfoodmicro.2021.109441