Julia C Schmidt1, Monika Astasov-Frauenhoffer2, Tuomas Waltimo2, Roland Weiger1, Clemens Walter3. 1. Department of Periodontology, Endodontology, and Cariology, University Centre for Dental Medicine, University of Basel, Hebelstrasse 3, 4056, Basel, Switzerland. 2. Clinic for Preventive Dentistry and Oral Microbiology, University Centre for Dental Medicine, University of Basel, Hebelstrasse 3, 4056, Basel, Switzerland. 3. Department of Periodontology, Endodontology, and Cariology, University Centre for Dental Medicine, University of Basel, Hebelstrasse 3, 4056, Basel, Switzerland. clemens.walter@unibas.ch.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of four different side-to-side toothbrushes and the impact of various brushing parameters on noncontact biofilm removal in an adjustable interdental space model. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A three-species biofilm, consisting of Porphyromonas gingivalis, Fusobacterium nucleatum, and Streptococcus sanguinis, was formed in vitro on protein-coated titanium disks using a flow chamber combined with a static biofilm growth model. Subsequently, the biofilm-coated disks were exposed to four different powered toothbrushes (A, B, C, D). The parameters distance (0 and 1 mm), brushing time (2, 4, and 6 s), interdental space width (1, 2, and 3 mm), and toothbrush angulation (45° and 90°) were tested. The biofilm volumes were determined using volumetric analyses with confocal laser scanning microscope (Zeiss LSM700) images and Imaris version 7.7.2 software. RESULTS: The median percentages of simulated interdental biofilm reduction by the tested toothbrushes ranged from 7 to 64 %. The abilities of the analyzed toothbrushes to reduce the in vitro biofilm differed significantly (p < 0.05). Three of the tested toothbrushes (A, B, C) were able to significantly reduce a simulated interdental biofilm by noncontact brushing (p ≤ 0.005). The brushing parameters and their combinations tested in the experiments revealed only minor effects on in vitro interdental biofilm reduction (p > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: A three-species in vitro biofilm could be altered by noncontact brushing with toothbrushes A, B, and C in an artificial interdental space model. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Certain side-to-side toothbrushes demonstrate in vitro a high efficacy in interdental biofilm removal without bristle-to-biofilm contact.
OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of four different side-to-side toothbrushes and the impact of various brushing parameters on noncontact biofilm removal in an adjustable interdental space model. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A three-species biofilm, consisting of Porphyromonas gingivalis, Fusobacterium nucleatum, and Streptococcus sanguinis, was formed in vitro on protein-coated titanium disks using a flow chamber combined with a static biofilm growth model. Subsequently, the biofilm-coated disks were exposed to four different powered toothbrushes (A, B, C, D). The parameters distance (0 and 1 mm), brushing time (2, 4, and 6 s), interdental space width (1, 2, and 3 mm), and toothbrush angulation (45° and 90°) were tested. The biofilm volumes were determined using volumetric analyses with confocal laser scanning microscope (Zeiss LSM700) images and Imaris version 7.7.2 software. RESULTS: The median percentages of simulated interdental biofilm reduction by the tested toothbrushes ranged from 7 to 64 %. The abilities of the analyzed toothbrushes to reduce the in vitro biofilm differed significantly (p < 0.05). Three of the tested toothbrushes (A, B, C) were able to significantly reduce a simulated interdental biofilm by noncontact brushing (p ≤ 0.005). The brushing parameters and their combinations tested in the experiments revealed only minor effects on in vitro interdental biofilm reduction (p > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: A three-species in vitro biofilm could be altered by noncontact brushing with toothbrushes A, B, and C in an artificial interdental space model. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Certain side-to-side toothbrushes demonstrate in vitro a high efficacy in interdental biofilm removal without bristle-to-biofilm contact.
Authors: H J Busscher; M Rustema-Abbing; G M Bruinsma; M de Jager; B Gottenbos; H C van der Mei Journal: Eur J Oral Sci Date: 2003-12 Impact factor: 2.612
Authors: Julia C Schmidt; Monika Astasov-Frauenhoffer; Tuomas Waltimo; Roland Weiger; Clemens Walter Journal: Clin Oral Investig Date: 2018-01-22 Impact factor: 3.573
Authors: Julia C Difloe-Geisert; Sarah Fiedler; Eva M Kulik; Nadine Schlueter; Carolina Ganss; Clemens Walter Journal: Clin Oral Investig Date: 2022-01-11 Impact factor: 3.573