These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.
Pubmed for Handhelds
PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS
Search MEDLINE/PubMed
Title: In vitro evaluation of membranes for regenerative procedures against oral bacteria. Author: Gil ACK, Prado MM, Rocha LRD, Benfatti C, Schuldt Filho G, Almeida J. Journal: Braz Dent J; 2023; 34(3):57-65. PubMed ID: 37466526. Abstract: The current literature on guided bone regeneration (GBR) and guided tissue regeneration (GTR) membrane contamination reports that the physicochemical characteristics of these biomaterials might influence affinity to bacteria, which appears to be a major drawback for the clinical outcome of the regenerative procedures. Thus, this study aimed to evaluate, in vitro, a multispecies biofilm adherence and passage of bacteria through different types of commercially available membranes for GTR/GBR. Four types of membranes were tested (n=12): LC) Lumina Coat®; JS) Jason®; BG) Biogide®; and LP) Lumina PTFE®. Aluminum foil (AL) simulated an impermeable barrier and was used as the control. The membranes were adapted to specific apparatus and challenged with a mixed bacterial culture composed of A. actinomycetemcomitans b, S. mutans, S. mitis, and A. israelii. After 2 h or 7 days, bacterial adhesion and passage of bacteria were evaluated through CFU counting, which was analyzed by two-way ANOVA e post hoc Tukey, at a 5% significance level. Representative areas of two membranes of each group were analyzed through scanning electron microscopy (SEM) to assess the morphology and organization of the biofilm over the membrane fibers. LC and LP presented similar values of adhered bacterial cells (p > 0.05), significantly inferior when compared to the other groups, in both time points (p < 0.05). All the tested groups were permeable to bacterial cells, with no significant difference between the trial period of 2 h and 7 days (p > 0.05). SEM analyses demonstrated that adhered bacteria number increased throughout the time points (2 h < 7 days). Commercially available biological membranes demonstrated intense bacterial adherence and passage of bacteria, which increased throughout the trial period. O objetivo deste estudo foi avaliar, in vitro, a aderência do biofilme multiespécie e a passagem de bactérias através dos diferentes tipos de membranas disponíveis comercialmente para RTG/ROG. Quatro tipos de membranas foram testados (n=12): LC) Lumina Coat®; JS) Jason®; BG) Biogide®; e LP) Lumina PTFE®. Papel alumínio (AL) simulou uma barreira impermeável e foi usado como controle negativo. As membranas foram adaptadas à um aparato específico e desafiadas com uma cultura bacteriana mista composta de A. actinomycetemcomitans b, S. mutans, S. mitis, e A. israelii. Após 2 h ou 7 dias, a aderência e passagem bacteriana foi avaliada através da contagem de UFCs. Duas membranas de cada grupo foram analisadas através da microscopia eletrônica de varredura (MEV). LC e LP apresentaram valores semelhantes de células bacterianas aderidas (p < 0.05), significativamente inferiores quando comparados aos outros grupos, em ambos os períodos experimentais (p < 0.05). Desde a análise inicial, todos os grupos testados foram permeáveis às células bacterianas, sem diferença significativa entre o período experimental de 2 h e 7 dias (p > 0.05). As análises em MEV demonstraram que o número de bactérias aderidas aumentou com o tempo (2 h < 7 days). Membranas biológicas comercialmente disponíveis demonstraram intensa aderência bacteriana e passagem de bactérias, que aumentou durante os períodos experimentais.[Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]