| Literature DB >> 27877582 |
Isabel Carvalho1, Mariana Henriques2, João Carlos Oliveira3, Cristiana Filipa Almeida Alves4, Ana Paula Piedade3, Sandra Carvalho5.
Abstract
Staphylococcus epidermidis has emerged as one of the major nosocomial pathogens associated withEntities:
Keywords: 20.11; 30.1; biofilm; biomaterial; hydrophobicity; microorganism adhesion; sputtering
Year: 2013 PMID: 27877582 PMCID: PMC5090513 DOI: 10.1088/1468-6996/14/3/035009
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Technol Adv Mater ISSN: 1468-6996 Impact factor: 8.090
Chemical composition, deposition parameters, thickness and deposition rate of deposited coatings.
| Samples Ag/Ti | Chemical Composition (at.%) | Current density (mA cm−2) | Thickness ( | Deposition rate ( | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ti | C | N | O | Ag | Ti | Ti+Ag | |||||
| 0 | 39 | 22 | 34 | 5 | 0 | 5 | 2 | 10 | 0 | 2.8±0.1 | 1.6 |
| 0.37 | 27 | 20 | 38 | 5 | 10 | 4 | 1.7 | 5.2 | 3.7 | 1.8±0.2 | 1.1 |
| 0.62 | 24 | 22 | 36 | 3 | 15 | 3 | 1.2 | 3.5 | 3 | 2.5±0.3 | 1.5 |
Gas flow.
Figure 1.XRD patterns of the Ag–TiCN coatings deposited by dc reactive magnetron sputtering and in the right the deconvolution of peak Ag/Ti = 0.62.
Figure 2.Raman spectra of the Ag–TiCN coatings.
Figure 3.Cross-sectional SEM micrographs of coatings: (a) Ag/Ti = 0, (b) Ag/Ti = 0.37 and (c) Ag/Ti = 0.62. The insets show the SEM image from the sample surface where in (a) the top of column TiCN is evident and in (b) and (c) Ag clusters are visible (BSE image).
Figure 4.AFM images of coatings with a scan range of 5 × 5 μm. Ra is the arithmetic mean of surface roughness of every measurement within the total distance roughness average and rms is the root mean square roughness.
Water (θW), formamide (θF) and α-bromonaphtalene (θ) contact angles, surface energy components (apolar Lifshitz–van der Waals surface free energy component, γLW; electron acceptor surface free energy component, γ+; and electron donor surface free energy component, γ−), and degree of hydrophobicity (ΔGmwm) of the Ag–TiCN coatings surface.
| Sample Ag/Ti | Contact angle±SD | Surface energy components (mJ m−2) | Δ | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0 | 112.6±2.9 | 60.7±2.6 | 74.1±2.7 | 18.0 | 9.0 | 0.0 | −41.7 |
| 0.37 | 99.3±2.4 | 78.5±2.0 | 65.1±1.4 | 22.4 | 0.2 | 1.3 | −70.6 |
| 0.62 | 114.6±2.0 | 102.0±1.7 | 91.5±4.5 | 10.5 | 0.0 | 1.1 | −82.3 |
Standard deviation.
Figure 5.Logarithm of bacterial concentration after 2 and 24 h contact between Ag–TiCN coatings and the S. epidermidis strain: (a) IE186 and (b) 1457.
Figure 6.SEM micrographs of S. epidermidis IE186 adhered to Ag–TiCN coatings after 2 and 24 h periods of contact: adhesion and biofilm formation to Ag/Ti = 0 (a1) and (a2), respectively; to Ag/Ti = 0.37 (b1) and (b2), respectively; to Ag/Ti = 0.62 (c1) and (c2), respectively.
Figure 7.SEM micrographs of S. epidermidis 1457 adhered to Ag–TiCN coatings after 2 and 24 h periods of contact: adhesion and biofilm formation to Ag/Ti = 0 (a1) and (a2), respectively; to Ag/Ti = 0.37 (b1) and (b2), respectively; to Ag/Ti = 0.62 (c1) and (c2), respectively.
Figure 8.Schematic of bacterial adhesion (not to scale).
Figure 9.AFM section profile obtained on Ag–TiCN coating with zero Ag/Ti atomic ratio.