| Literature DB >> 29619438 |
Ernie Maduratna Setiawatie1, Vina Puji Lestari2, Suryani Dyah Astuti2.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Aggregatibacter actinomycetemcomitans (A.actinomycetemcomitans) is an anaerobic bacterium has been frequently associated with aggressive periodontitis. Photodynamic therapy (PDT) is a medical treatment to prevent infection progression that utilizes light to activate a photosensitizing agent. Doxycycline is an antibacterial having photosensitivity. This study aimed to evaluate potential doxycycline as an antibacterial and photosensitizer combine PDT against A.actinomycetemcomitans bacteria.Entities:
Keywords: Aggregatibacter actinomycetemcomitans; Photodynamic therapy; doxycycline
Year: 2018 PMID: 29619438 PMCID: PMC5876780 DOI: 10.2101/Ajid.12v1S.14
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Afr J Infect Dis ISSN: 2006-0165
Figure 1The absorption spectrum of doxycycline as in wavelength of 200 – 500 nm
Irradiation data with time variation
| LaserPower (W) | Area (cm2) | Wave length (nm) | Doxycycline Uptake | Time (s) | Radiation (J/cm2) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 10 | 1.228 | ||||
| 30 | 3.684 | ||||
| 0.049502 | 0.403 | 409 | 0.999898 | 50 | 6.140 |
| 70 | 8.597 | ||||
| 90 | 11.053 | ||||
| 120 | 14.737 |
Data of Mc Farl and standard establishment
| OD 595nm | Dilution to- | Sample | Average | CFU/ml | Log CFU/ml | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | |||||
| 0.44 | 5 | 451 | 578 | 198 | 390 | 404.25 | 8.09x10-7 | 7.908 |
| 0.54 | 6 | 372 | 424 | 343 | 354 | 373.25 | 7.47x10-8 | 8.873 |
| 0.59 | 7 | 369 | 190 | 321 | 272 | 288 | 5.76x10-9 | 9.760 |
| 0.65 | 8 | 128 | 178 | 130 | 124 | 140 | 2.80x10-10 | 10.447 |
Figure 3Bacterial viability in varying treatment of laser and doxycycline 0.1%
Results of Dilution Standard of A.actinomycetemcomitans Bacteria
| Dilution to- | Sample | Average | CFU/ml | Log CFU/ml | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | ||||
| 10-5 | 445 | 329 | 418 | 401 | 398.25 | 7.97x107 | 7.90 |
| 10-6 | 335 | 395 | 431 | 399 | 390.00 | 7.80 x108 | 8.89 |
| 10-7 | 267 | 294 | 271 | 292 | 281.00 | 5.62 x109 | 9.75 |
| 10-8 | 148 | 118 | 101 | 132 | 124.75 | 2.50 x1010 | 10.39 |
| 10-9 | 81 | 83 | 97 | 68 | 82.25 | 1.65 x1011 | 11.21 |
| 10-10 | 68 | 56 | 47 | 53 | 56.00 | 1.12 x1012 | 12.04 |
The percentage reduction of bacterial viability in various treatments
| Treatments group | Time ex-posure (s) | Laser intensi-ty (J/cm2) | Number of Colonies | CFU/ml | Log CFU/ml | % reduction of viability |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0 | - | 288 | 5.32E+09 | 9.726 | 0 | |
| 10 | - | 265.75 | 5.76E+09 | 9.760 | 0 | |
| 30 | - | 269.25 | 5.39E+09 | 9.731 | 0 | |
| 50 | - | 276.5 | 5.53E+09 | 9.743 | 0 | |
| 70 | - | 301.25 | 6.03E+09 | 9.780 | 0 | |
| 90 | - | 303 | 6.06E+09 | 9.782 | 0 | |
| 120 | - | 259.75 | 5.20E+09 | 9.716 | 0 | |
| 0 | 0.000 | 275.5 | 5.51E+09 | 9.741 | 4.36 | |
| 10 | 1.228 | 157.75 | 3.16E+09 | 9.499 | 42.74 | |
| 30 | 3.685 | 151.75 | 3.04E+09 | 9.482 | 44.91 | |
| 50 | 6.141 | 148.5 | 2.97E+09 | 9.473 | 46.28 | |
| 70 | 8.598 | 142.25 | 2.85E+09 | 9.454 | 48.37 | |
| 90 | 11.055 | 84.5 | 1.69E+09 | 9.228 | 69.33 | |
| 120 | 14.740 | 35.5 | 7.10E+08 | 8.851 | 88.50 | |
| 0 | - | 224.25 | 4.49E+09 | 9.652 | 15.62 | |
| 10 | - | 123.5 | 2.47E+09 | 9.393 | 44.92 | |
| 30 | - | 114.25 | 2.29E+09 | 9.359 | 49.05 | |
| 50 | - | 110.75 | 2.22E+09 | 9.345 | 50.61 | |
| 70 | - | 96.25 | 1.93E+09 | 9.284 | 57.08 | |
| 90 | - | 91.5 | 1.83E+09 | 9.262 | 59.19 | |
| 120 | - | 90.5 | 1.81E+09 | 9.258 | 59.64 | |
| 0 | 0.000 | 250 | 5.00E+09 | 9.699 | 5.93 | |
| 10 | 1.228 | 104.25 | 2.09E+09 | 9.319 | 58.30 | |
| 30 | 3.684 | 73.25 | 1.47E+09 | 9.166 | 70.70 | |
| 50 | 6.140 | 57 | 1.14E+09 | 9.057 | 77.20 | |
| 70 | 8.597 | 56 | 1.12E+09 | 9.049 | 77.60 | |
| 90 | 11.053 | 53.75 | 1.08E+09 | 9.031 | 78.50 | |
| 120 | 14.737 | 28.75 | 5.75E+08 | 8.760 | 88.79 | |
The results of ANOVA factorial test and post hoc of the treatments
| Factor | Grup | N | % reduction of bacterial viability | ANOVA Factorial test | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| average | SD | Sig | conclusion | |||
| Laser | Laser 10 s(a) | 4 | 42.74 | 5.49 | p = 0.000 | Significant difference |
| Laser s 30 s (ab) | 4 | 44.91 | 1.69 | |||
| Laser 50 s(ab) | 4 | 46.28 | 1.90 | |||
| Laser 70 s (ab) | 4 | 48.37 | 4.28 | |||
| Laser 90 s (abc) | 4 | 69.33 | 3.61 | |||
| Laser 120 s (c) | 4 | 88.50 | 2.83 | |||
| Total | 72 | 61.76 | 3.26 | |||
| Doxy 0.1% | Doxy 10 s (ab) | 4 | 44.92 | 2.50 | p = 0.000 | Significant difference |
| Doxy 30 s (ab) | 4 | 49.05 | 3.95 | |||
| Doxy 50 s (ab) | 4 | 50.61 | 3.97 | |||
| Doxy 70 s (abc) | 4 | 57.08 | 3.05 | |||
| Doxy 90 s (abc) | 4 | 59.19 | 3.93 | |||
| Doxy 120 s (abc) | 4 | 59.64 | 3.62 | |||
| Total | 72 | 61.76 | 3.26 | |||
| Laser+Doxy 10 s (abc) | 4 | 58.30 | 3.05 | p = 0.000 | Significant difference | |
| Laser+Doxy 30 s (abc) | 4 | 70.70 | 2.43 | |||
| Laser+Doxy 50 s (abc) | 4 | 77.20 | 2.03 | |||
| Laser Doxy 0.1% | Laser+Doxy 70 s (abc) | 4 | 77.60 | 2.82 | ||
| Laser+Doxy 90 s (bc) | 4 | 78.50 | 1.70 | |||
| Laser+Doxy 120 s (c) | 4 | 88.79 | 2.60 | |||
| Total | 72 | 61.76 | 19.26 | |||