Y He1, B W Peterson1, Y Ren2, H C van der Mei3, H J Busscher1. 1. Department of Biomedical Engineering, University of Groningen and University Medical Center Groningen, Antonius Deusinglaan 1, 9713 AV, Groningen, The Netherlands. 2. Department of Orthodontics, University of Groningen and University Medical Center Groningen, Hanzeplein 1, 9700 RB, Groningen, The Netherlands. 3. Department of Biomedical Engineering, University of Groningen and University Medical Center Groningen, Antonius Deusinglaan 1, 9713 AV, Groningen, The Netherlands. h.c.van.der.mei@umcg.nl.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Oral biofilm is inevitably left behind, even after powered brushing. As a special feature, powered brushing removes biofilm in a noncontact mode. When the brushing distance becomes too large, biofilm is left behind. We hypothesize that biofilm left behind after brushing has different viscoelastic properties than before brushing, impacting antimicrobial penetration. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In vitro grown dual-species biofilms were subjected to 20 % mechanical deformation before and after powered brushing at 4-mm brushing distance. Biofilm thickness and stress relaxation were measured for unbrushed and brushed biofilms. Stress relaxation was analyzed with a three-element Maxwell model. Antimicrobial penetration from five mouthrinses was microscopically evaluated for unbrushed and brushed biofilms. RESULTS: Thicknesses of unbrushed and brushed biofilms were similar. Brushing decreased the prevalence of fast and increased the prevalence of slow relaxation elements, which was accompanied by deeper penetration of chlorhexidine and cetylpyridinium chloride. Penetration of antimicrobials from other mouthrinses was relatively low in unbrushed and brushed biofilms. CONCLUSIONS: This confirmation of our hypothesis points to an additional advantage of powered toothbrushing in a noncontact mode, changing the viscoelastic properties of biofilm in a direction that increases antimicrobial penetration of chlorhexidine and cetylpyridinium. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: The biofilm left behind after noncontact powered toothbrushing may have less recalcitrance toward penetration of chlorhexidine and cetylpyridinium chloride than prior to brushing.
OBJECTIVES: Oral biofilm is inevitably left behind, even after powered brushing. As a special feature, powered brushing removes biofilm in a noncontact mode. When the brushing distance becomes too large, biofilm is left behind. We hypothesize that biofilm left behind after brushing has different viscoelastic properties than before brushing, impacting antimicrobial penetration. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In vitro grown dual-species biofilms were subjected to 20 % mechanical deformation before and after powered brushing at 4-mm brushing distance. Biofilm thickness and stress relaxation were measured for unbrushed and brushed biofilms. Stress relaxation was analyzed with a three-element Maxwell model. Antimicrobial penetration from five mouthrinses was microscopically evaluated for unbrushed and brushed biofilms. RESULTS: Thicknesses of unbrushed and brushed biofilms were similar. Brushing decreased the prevalence of fast and increased the prevalence of slow relaxation elements, which was accompanied by deeper penetration of chlorhexidine and cetylpyridinium chloride. Penetration of antimicrobials from other mouthrinses was relatively low in unbrushed and brushed biofilms. CONCLUSIONS: This confirmation of our hypothesis points to an additional advantage of powered toothbrushing in a noncontact mode, changing the viscoelastic properties of biofilm in a direction that increases antimicrobial penetration of chlorhexidine and cetylpyridinium. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: The biofilm left behind after noncontact powered toothbrushing may have less recalcitrance toward penetration of chlorhexidine and cetylpyridinium chloride than prior to brushing.
Authors: Andrew J McBain; Robert G Bartolo; Carl E Catrenich; Duane Charbonneau; Ruth G Ledder; Peter Gilbert Journal: Appl Environ Microbiol Date: 2003-08 Impact factor: 4.792
Authors: Julia C Schmidt; Monika Astasov-Frauenhoffer; Tuomas Waltimo; Roland Weiger; Clemens Walter Journal: Clin Oral Investig Date: 2016-10-19 Impact factor: 3.573
Authors: Thomas Thurnheer; Elodie Rohrer; Georgios N Belibasakis; Thomas Attin; Patrick R Schmidlin Journal: Clin Oral Investig Date: 2013-12-08 Impact factor: 3.573
Authors: Brandon W Peterson; Yan He; Yijin Ren; Aidan Zerdoum; Matthew R Libera; Prashant K Sharma; Arie-Jan van Winkelhoff; Danielle Neut; Paul Stoodley; Henny C van der Mei; Henk J Busscher Journal: FEMS Microbiol Rev Date: 2015-02-02 Impact factor: 16.408
Authors: Jiapeng Hou; Can Wang; René T Rozenbaum; Niar Gusnaniar; Ed D de Jong; Willem Woudstra; Gésinda I Geertsema-Doornbusch; Jelly Atema-Smit; Jelmer Sjollema; Yijin Ren; Henk J Busscher; Henny C van der Mei Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2019-07-05 Impact factor: 4.379
Authors: Abdullkhaleg Ali Albashari; Yan He; Mohammed A Albaadani; Yangfan Xiang; Jihea Ali; Fengting Hu; Yuan Zhang; Keke Zhang; Lihua Luo; Jianming Wang; Qingsong Ye Journal: Front Cell Dev Biol Date: 2021-04-01