| Literature DB >> 29799473 |
Akira Kuroiwa1, Yoshiaki Nomura2, Tsuyoshi Ochiai3,4,5, Tomomi Sudo6, Rie Nomoto7, Tohru Hayakawa8, Hiroyuki Kanzaki9, Yoshiki Nakamura10, Nobuhiro Hanada11.
Abstract
Photocatalysts have multiple applications in air purifiers, paints, and self-cleaning coatings for medical devices such as catheters, as well as in the elimination of xenobiotics. In this study, a coating of a UV-responsive photocatalyst, titanium dioxide (TiO₂), was applied to an orthodontic resin. The antibacterial activity on oral bacteria as well as hydrophilic properties and mechanical properties of the TiO₂-coated resin were investigated. ultraviolet A (UVA) (352 nm) light was used as the light source. Antibacterial activity was examined with or without irradiation. Measurements of early colonizers and cariogenic bacterial count, i.e., colony forming units (CFU), were performed after irradiation for different time durations. Hydrophilic properties were evaluated by water contact angle measurements. While, for the assessment of mechanical properties, flexural strength was measured by the three-point bending test. In the coat(+)light(+) samples the CFU were markedly decreased compared to the control samples. Water contact angle of the coat(+)light(+) samples was decreased after irradiation. The flexural strength of the specimen irradiated for long time showed a higher value than the required standard value, indicating that the effect of irradiation was weak. We suggest that coating with the ultraviolet responsive photocatalyst TiO₂ is useful for the development of orthodontic resin with antimicrobial properties.Entities:
Keywords: antibacterial; cariogenic; early colonizer; hydrophilic properties; irradiation; orthodontic resin; photocatalyst TiO2
Year: 2018 PMID: 29799473 PMCID: PMC6025295 DOI: 10.3390/ma11060889
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Materials (Basel) ISSN: 1996-1944 Impact factor: 3.623
Figure 1Antibacterial effects of TiO2 photocatalysis against (A) Streptococcus gordonii; (B) Streptococcus oralis ATCC. coat(+)light(+): experiment group containing powdered TiO2 with irradiation. coat(−)light(−): control group without both TiO2 and irradiation. coat(+)light(−): experiment group in the presence of powdered TiO2 without irradiation. coat(−)light(−): experiment group without TiO2, but with irradiation.
Figure 2Antibacterial effects on various specimens of Streptococcus sobrinus, Streptococcus oralis GTC, Streptococcus mutans, and Streptococcus sanguinis at (A) 90 min, and (B) 120 min of ultraviolet A (UVA) irradiation.
Models of three way ANOVA for changes in bacterial counts. p-values less than 0.05 were considered statistically significant.
|
|
|
|
| ||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ||
| Intercept | 6.563 | 6.04–7.08 | 0.999< | 8.267 | 7.57–8.96 | 0.999< | 6.584 | 6.18–6.98 | 0.999< | 8.840 | 8.30–9.37 | 0.999< | |
| time | 30 min | −0.061 | −0.67–0.55 | 0.845 | −0.306 | −1.13–0.52 | 0.462 | −0.372 | −0.84–0.10 | 0.123 | −0.498 | −1.13–0.13 | 0.122 |
| 60 min | −0.238 | −0.85–0.37 | 0.444 | −0.753 | −1.57–0.07 | 0.073 | −0.616 | −1.09–−0.14 | 0.012 | −0.700 | −1.33–−0.06 | 0.031 | |
| 90 min | −0.458 | −1.07–0.15 | 0.143 | −1.246 | −2.07–−0.42 | <0.001 | −0.846 | −1.32–−0.37 | <0.001 | −0.877 | −1.51–−0.24 | <0.001 | |
| 120 min | −1.001 | −1.61–−0.38 | <0.001 | −1.671 | −2.49–−0.84 | <0.001 | −1.003 | −1.47–−0.52 | <0.001 | −1.260 | −1.89–−0.62 | <0.001 | |
| 150 min | −1.175 | −1.79–−0.55 | <0.001 | −1.935 | −2.75–−1.10 | <0.001 | −1.231 | −1.70–−0.75 | <0.001 | −1.576 | −2.21–−0.94 | <0.001 | |
| 180 min | −1.654 | −2.27–−1.03 | <0.001 | −2.432 | −3.25–−1.60 | <0.001 | −1.491 | −1.96–−1.01 | <0.001 | −1.820 | −2.45–−1,18 | <0.001 | |
| coat(+) | −0.001 | −0.46–0.46 | 0.996 | −0.015 | −0.63–0.60 | 0.963 | 0.017 | −0.34–0.37 | 0.925 | −0.008 | −0.48–0.47 | 0.975 | |
| light(+) | −0.695 | −1.16–−0.22 | <0.001 | −1.457 | −2.08–−0.83 | <0.001 | −1.247 | −1.60–−0.88 | <0.001 | −1.338 | −1.81–−0.85 | <0.001 | |
| interaction of light and coat | −1.216 | −1.87–−0.55 | <0.001 | −1.845 | −2.72–−0.96 | <0.001 | −0.727 | −1.23–−0.21 | 0.006 | −1.206 | −1.88–−0.52 | <0.001 | |
|
|
|
| |||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |||||
| Intercept | 5.609 | 5.38–5.83 | 0.999< | 11.066 | 10.68–11.44 | 0.999< | 9.280 | 8.90–9.65 | 0.999< | ||||
| time | 30 min | −0.119 | −0.38–0.14 | 0.376 | −0.585 | −1.03–−0.13 | 0.011 | −0.105 | −0.54–0.33 | 0.638 | |||
| 60 min | −0.272 | −0.53–−0.01 | 0.044 | −0.938 | −1.38–−0.49 | <0.001 | −0.231 | −0.67–0.20 | 0.299 | ||||
| 90 min | −0.347 | −0.61–−0.82 | 0.011 | −1.121 | −1.56–−0.67 | <0.001 | −0.348 | −0.78–0.09 | 0.120 | ||||
| 120 min | −0.512 | −0.77–−0.24 | <0.001 | −1.146 | −1.59–−0.70 | <0.001 | −0.718 | −1.15–−0.27 | 0.002 | ||||
| 150 min | −0.512 | −0.77–−0.24 | <0.001 | −1.404 | −1.85–−0.95 | <0.001 | −0.848 | −1.28–−0.40 | <0.001 | ||||
| 180 min | −0.908 | −1.17–−0.64 | <0.001 | −1.555 | −2.00–−1.10 | <0.001 | −1.239 | −1.67–−0.79 | <0.001 | ||||
| coat(+) | <0.001 | −0.20–0.20 | 0.998 | 0.001 | −0.33–0.33 | 0.995 | <0.001 | −0.33–0.33 | 0.999< | ||||
| light(+) | −0.480 | −0.67–−0.27 | <0.001 | −1.587 | −1.92–−1.25 | <0.001 | −0.514 | −0.84–−0.18 | 0.003 | ||||
| interaction of light and coat | −0.557 | −0.84–−0.27 | <0.001 | −0.680 | −1.15–−0.20 | 0.006 | −0.948 | −1.41–−0.47 | <0.001 | ||||
Figure 3Scanning electron microscopy of cross sectional photographs of the TiO2 coating.
Figure 4Flexural strength (A) and Flexural modulus (B) of the TiO2-coated resin plates upon UV irradiation.
Figure 5(A) Water contact angle of the resin plates with TiO2-coating upon UV irradiation for 0, 30, 60, and 120 min. (B) Image shows contact angle of a water droplet on non-coated (left) and TiO2-coated resin plate (right) after 120 min of UV irradiation.