Daisuke Inoue1, Tamon Kabata1, Kaori Ohtani2, Yoshitomo Kajino1, Toshiharu Shirai3, Hiroyuki Tsuchiya4. 1. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Graduate School of Medical Science, Kanazawa University, 13-1 Takaramachi, Kanazawa, Ishikawa, 920-8641, Japan. 2. Depertment of Bacteriology, Graduate School of Medical Science, Kanazawa University, Kanazawa, Japan. 3. Department of Orthopaedics, Graduate School of Medical Science, Kyoto Prefectural University of Medicine, Kyoto, Japan. 4. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Graduate School of Medical Science, Kanazawa University, 13-1 Takaramachi, Kanazawa, Ishikawa, 920-8641, Japan. tsuchi@med.kanazawa-u.ac.jp.
Abstract
PURPOSE: We have developed iodine-supported titanium implants that suppress microbial activities and conducted in vivo and in vitro studies to determine their antimicrobial properties. METHODS: The implants were Ti-6Al-4 V titanium implants either untreated (Ti), treated with oxide film on the Ti surface by anodization (Ti-O), or treated with an iodine coating on oxidation film (Ti-I). The strain of bacteria used in this study was Gram-positive Staphylococcus aureus strain ATCC 25923. We analyzed the antibacterial attachment effects in vivo by using rats. The attachment bacteria on the implant surface were evaluated using a spread-plate method assay. A biofilm study was performed in vitro. The biofilm formed after bacterial attachment was qualitatively studied with fluorescence microscopy (FM) and scanning electron microscopy (SEM). Also, the formed biofilm was quantitatively studied with a spread-plate method assay. RESULTS: In vivo analysis of antimicrobial attachment effects showed that the mean viable bacterial number was significantly lower on Ti-I than Ti or Ti-O surfaces. In the in vitro biofilm study, FM and SEM images showed thick and mature biofilm formation on Ti and Ti-O and thin, small biofilm formation on Ti-I. A quantitative biofilm analysis found a significant difference in the number of viable bacteria between Ti-I and Ti or Ti-O. CONCLUSIONS: This study showed that iodine-supported implants have a good antibacterial attachment effect and inhibit biofilm formation and growth. Iodine-supported implants may have great potential as innovative antibacterial implants that can prevent implant related infection in orthopaedic surgery.
PURPOSE: We have developed iodine-supported titanium implants that suppress microbial activities and conducted in vivo and in vitro studies to determine their antimicrobial properties. METHODS: The implants were Ti-6Al-4 V titanium implants either untreated (Ti), treated with oxide film on the Ti surface by anodization (Ti-O), or treated with an iodine coating on oxidation film (Ti-I). The strain of bacteria used in this study was Gram-positive Staphylococcus aureus strain ATCC 25923. We analyzed the antibacterial attachment effects in vivo by using rats. The attachment bacteria on the implant surface were evaluated using a spread-plate method assay. A biofilm study was performed in vitro. The biofilm formed after bacterial attachment was qualitatively studied with fluorescence microscopy (FM) and scanning electron microscopy (SEM). Also, the formed biofilm was quantitatively studied with a spread-plate method assay. RESULTS: In vivo analysis of antimicrobial attachment effects showed that the mean viable bacterial number was significantly lower on Ti-I than Ti or Ti-O surfaces. In the in vitro biofilm study, FM and SEM images showed thick and mature biofilm formation on Ti and Ti-O and thin, small biofilm formation on Ti-I. A quantitative biofilm analysis found a significant difference in the number of viable bacteria between Ti-I and Ti or Ti-O. CONCLUSIONS: This study showed that iodine-supported implants have a good antibacterial attachment effect and inhibit biofilm formation and growth. Iodine-supported implants may have great potential as innovative antibacterial implants that can prevent implant related infection in orthopaedic surgery.
Entities:
Keywords:
Antibacterial attachment effect; Biofilm; Implant related infection; Iodine-supported implant
Authors: Carla Renata Arciola; Davide Campoccia; Pietro Speziale; Lucio Montanaro; John William Costerton Journal: Biomaterials Date: 2012-06-12 Impact factor: 12.479
Authors: Jessica Amber Jennings; Daniel P Carpenter; Karen S Troxel; Karen E Beenken; Mark S Smeltzer; Harry S Courtney; Warren O Haggard Journal: Clin Orthop Relat Res Date: 2015-07 Impact factor: 4.176
Authors: Sara Nganga; Andrea Travan; Eleonora Marsich; Ivan Donati; Eva Söderling; Niko Moritz; Sergio Paoletti; Pekka K Vallittu Journal: J Mater Sci Mater Med Date: 2013-08-07 Impact factor: 3.896
Authors: Laila Damiati; Marcus G Eales; Angela H Nobbs; Bo Su; Penelope M Tsimbouri; Manuel Salmeron-Sanchez; Matthew J Dalby Journal: J Tissue Eng Date: 2018-08-02 Impact factor: 7.813
Authors: Konstantinos Tsikopoulos; Konstantinos Sidiropoulos; Dimitrios Kitridis; Anas Hassan; Lorenzo Drago; Andreas Mavrogenis; Donald McBride Journal: Int Orthop Date: 2020-08-06 Impact factor: 3.075