| Literature DB >> 32287485 |
Yang Jiao1,2, Li-Na Niu1, Sai Ma1, Jing Li3, Franklin R Tay4, Ji-Hua Chen1.
Abstract
Microbial infections affect humans worldwide. Many quaternary ammonium compounds have been synthesized that are not only antibacterial, but also possess antifungal, antiviral and anti-matrix metalloproteinase capabilities. Incorporation of quaternary ammonium moieties into polymers represents one of the most promising strategies for preparation of antimicrobial biomaterials. Various polymerization techniques have been employed to prepare antimicrobial surfaces with quaternary ammonium functionalities; in particular, syntheses involving controlled radical polymerization techniques enable precise control over macromolecular structure, order and functionality. Although recent publications report exciting advances in the biomedical field, some of these technological developments have also been accompanied by potential toxicological and antimicrobial resistance challenges. Recent evidenced-based data on the biomedical applications of antimicrobial quaternary ammonium-containing biomaterials that are based on randomized human clinical trials, the golden standard in contemporary medicinal science, are included in the present review. This should help increase visibility, stimulate debates and spur conversations within a wider scientific community on the implications and plausibility for future developments of quaternary ammonium-based antimicrobial biomaterials.Entities:
Keywords: Antimicrobial resistance; Antimicrobial surfaces; Quaternary ammonium compounds; Toxicological aspects
Year: 2017 PMID: 32287485 PMCID: PMC7111226 DOI: 10.1016/j.progpolymsci.2017.03.001
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Prog Polym Sci ISSN: 0079-6700 Impact factor: 29.190
Major antibacterial materials and their mechanisms of action.
| Material type | Representative compounds | Mechanisms of action | Refs. |
|---|---|---|---|
| Antibiotics | Aminoglycosides (e.g. gentamicin, tobramycin) | Bind to the bacterial 30S ribosomal subunit and inhibit protein synthesis | |
| Glycopeptides (e.g. vancomycin) | Bind to amino acids and disrupt cell wall peptidoglycan synthesis | ||
| Penicillins (e.g. ampicillin) | Inhibit related enzymes and disrupt cell wall peptidoglycan synthesis | ||
| Quinolones (e.g. ciproflaxin, norfloxacin) | Inhibit DNA replication and transcription, targeting DNA topoisomerases II and IV | ||
| Rifamycins (e.g. rifampin) | Bind to RNA polymerase and inhibit transcription | ||
| Tetracyclines (e.g. minocycline, tetracycline) | Inhibit protein synthesis | ||
| Antimicrobial enzymes (AMEs) | Lysozyme | Catalyze glycosidic bond hydrolysis in bacterial cell wall peptidoglycans | |
| Acylase | Quorum-quenching | ||
| Antimicrobial peptides (AMPs) | Natural AMPs (e.g. human β-defensin 1–3, magainin and nisin) | Transmembrane pore formation, intracellular targeting and metabolic inhibition mechanisms (inhibition of microbial functional proteins, DNA and RNA synthesis) | |
| Synthetic AMPs (e.g. β-17, human neutrophil peptides 1 and 2, histatins 5 and 8) | |||
| Cationic compounds | Chitosan | Interaction between positively charged chitosan molecules and negatively charged bacterial cell membranes leads to disruption of cell membrane | |
| Chlorhexidine | Bind to negatively charged bacterial walls and disrupt cell walls | ||
| Poly(ε-lysine) | Electrostatic adsorption onto bacterial cell membranes and stripping of the outer membrane lead to cell death | ||
| Quaternary ammonium compounds (QACs) | Disruption of bacterial enzymes and cell membranes by positively charged polymers | ||
| Metal and metal oxides | AgNPs | Induce oxidative stresses, deactivate bacterial enzymes by binding to thiol groups and affect the function and permeability of the cell membranes | |
| CuNPs | Contribute to ROS formation and induce lipid peroxidation in bacterial membranes | ||
| TiO2NPs | Photocatalytically activate the production of ROS and interfere with phosphorylation, thereby causing oxidative cell death | ||
| ZnONPs | Generate ROS and binds to lipids and proteins, thus changing the osmotic balance and increasing membrane permeability | ||
| Other non-cationic compounds | Nitric oxide (NO) donors | Induce cellular nitrosative and oxidative stresses and act as a bacterial signaling disruptor | |
| Triclosan | Deactivate bacterial fatty acid biosynthesis through inhibition of the enoylacyl carrier protein reductase enzyme |
Fig. 1Schematic illustration of the use of quaternary ammonium compounds in antimicrobial biomedical materials.
Fig. 2Chemical structures of representative quaternary ammonium compounds in antimicrobial biomedical materials.
Antimicrobial activities of representative QACs against various pathogenic microorganisms and their cytocompatibility.
| Microorganism | QACs | Antimicrobial activity | Related niche | Cytotoxicity |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| MDPB | MIC 12.5 μg/mL | A/C/E | 0–40 μg/mL for 48 h. No cytotoxicity to HDPCs | |
| MDPB | MIC 3.13 μg/mL | A/E | ||
| MDPB | MIC 3.13–25.0 μg/mL | A/C/E | ||
| QAMP | MIC 20 μg/mL | Not assessed | ||
| MDPB | MIC 6.25 μg/mL | A/C/E | ||
| DMADDM | MIC 4.9 μg/mL | A/C/E | LC50 20–40 μg/mL to HGFs | |
| DMAEDM | MIC 20,000 μg/mL | LC50 20–40 μg/mL to HGFs | ||
| DMAE-CB | MIC 12.2 μg/mL | 0–2 μg/mL for 24 h. No cytotoxicity to L929 mouse fibroblasts | ||
| MAE-DB | MIC 6.1 μg/mL | LC50 10000–20000 μg/mL to HGFs | ||
| MAE-HB | MIC 24.4 μg/mL | LC50 10000–20000 μg/mL to HGFs | ||
| MDPB | MIC 31.3 μg/mL | A/E | ||
| EPSiQA | MIC 2.5 μg/mL | B/W | Not assessed | |
| MDPB | MIC 3.13–12.5 μg/mL | A/B/E/W | ||
| MUPB | MIC 630 μg/mL | IC50 50 μg/mL to L929 mouse fibroblasts | ||
| MUPB | MIC 830 μg/mL | A/E | ||
| MUPB | MIC 1040 μg/mL | A/E | ||
| HACC | MIC <2.5 mg/mL | B/W | 2500 μg/mL 6% or 18% substitution HACC for 48 h. No cytotoxicity to L929 mouse fibroblasts | |
| HACC | MIC <2.5 mg/mL | B/W | ||
| MDPB | MIC 31.3 μg/mL | A/E | ||
| EPSiQA | MIC 5.0 μg/mL | A/B/C/E/W | Not assessed | |
| DMADDM | MIC 9.8 μg/mL | A/E | ||
| DMAEDM | MIC 80,000 μg/mL | |||
| DMAE-CB | MIC 12.2 μg/mL | |||
| MAE-DB | MIC 12.2 μg/mL | |||
| MAE-HB | MIC 24.4 μg/mL | |||
| DMADDM | MIC 9.8 μg/mL | A/C/E | ||
| DMAEDM | MIC 40,000 μg/mL | |||
| DMAE-CB | MIC 3.1 μg/mL | |||
| MAE-DB | MIC 6.1 μg/mL | |||
| MAE-HB | MIC 3.1 μg/mL | |||
| MDPB | MIC 15.6 μg/mL | |||
| MDPB | MIC 15.6 μg/mL | A/C/E | ||
| DMAE-CB | MIC 2.4 μg/mL [58] | A/C/E | ||
| MUPB | MIC 630 μg/mL | |||
| QAMP | MIC 10 μg/mL | Not assessed | ||
| MDPB | MIC 15.6 μg/mL | A/C/E | ||
| MDPB | MIC 15.6 μg/mL | A/C/E | ||
| MDPB | MIC 7.8 μg/mL | A/C/E | ||
| MDPB | MIC 7.8 μg/mL | A/C/E | ||
| MDPB | MIC 15.6 μg/mL | A/C/E | ||
| MDPB | MIC 3.13-6.25 μg/mL | A/C/E | ||
| methicillin-resistant | HACC | MIC <2.5 mg/mL | B/W | |
| MDPB | MIC 3.9 μg/mL | A/B/E/W | ||
| MDPB | MIC 31.3 μg/mL | A/E | ||
| DMADDM | MIC 2.4 μg/mL | A/E | ||
| DMAEDM | MIC 20,000 μg/mL | |||
| DMAE-CB | MIC 3.1 μg/mL | |||
| MAE-DB | MIC 6.1 μg/mL | |||
| MAE-HB | MIC 3.1 μg/mL | |||
| DMADDM | MIC 2.4 μg/mL | A/E | ||
| DMAEDM | MIC 20,000 μg/mL | |||
| DMAE-CB | MIC 6.1 μg/mL | |||
| MAE-DB | MIC 6.1 μg/mL | |||
| MAE-HB | MIC 6.1 μg/mL | |||
| DMADDM | MIC 4.9 μg/mL | B/W | ||
| DMAEDM | MIC 40,000 μg/mL | |||
| DMAE-CB | MIC 12.2 μg/mL | |||
| EPSiQA | MIC 2.5 μg/mL | Not assessed | ||
| MAE-DB | MIC 12.2 μg/mL | |||
| MAE-HB | MIC 24.4 μg/mL | |||
| MUPB | MIC 1750 μg/mL | |||
| MDPB | MIC 16.7 μg/mL | A/C/E | ||
| MDPB | MIC 25.0 μg/mL | A/C/E | ||
| DMADDM | MIC 4.9 μg/mL | A/C/E | ||
| DMAEDM | MIC 20,000 μg/mL | |||
| DMAE-CB | MIC 3.1 μg/mL | |||
| DMAHDM | MIC 0.6 μg/mL | Not assessed | ||
| DDMAI | MIC 6.25 μg/mL | Not assessed | ||
| MAE-DB | MIC 6.1 μg/mL | |||
| MAE-HB | MIC 6.1 μg/mL | |||
| MDPB | MIC 12.5 μg/mL | |||
| MUPB | MIC 1040 μg/mL | |||
| PQAS | MIC 1.563 μg/mL | Not assessed | ||
| QAB | MIC 25 μg/mL | Not assessed | ||
| QADM | MIC 13,000 μg/mL | Not assessed | ||
| QAMP | MIC 20 μg/mL | Not assessed | ||
| MDPB | MIC 12.5 μg/mL | A/C/E | ||
| MDPB | MIC 6.25–12.5 μg/mL | C | ||
| DMADDM | MIC 1.2 μg/mL | C | ||
| DMAEDM | MIC 20,000 μg/mL | |||
| DMAE-CB | MIC 6.1 μg/mL | |||
| MAE-DB | MIC 12.2 μg/mL | |||
| MAE-HB | MIC 6.1 μg/mL | |||
| MDPB | MIC 16.7 μg/mL [66] | |||
| MDPB | MIC 7.8 μg/mL | A/C/E |
Related niche. A: apical periodontitis; B: bone infections; C: caries; E: endodontic infections; W: wound infections.
Fig. 3Immobilization methods to produce antimicrobial surfaces by covalent attachment. [116], Copyright 2009.
Fig. 4Difference in biocidal activity of surfaces prepared by the “grafting onto” and the “grafting from” approaches. QA: quaternary amine group. [119], Copyright 2008.
Typical antimicrobial surfaces immobilized with QA moieties prepared via surface-initiated controlled radical polymerization (SI-CRP).
| Substrate | Grafted monomer | SI-CRP technique | Microorganisms tested | Refs. |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Glass, filter paper | DMAEMA | SI-ATRP | ||
| Glass, silicon wafer | DMAEMA | SI-ATRP | ||
| Glass | DMAEMA, TMSPMA | SI-ATRP | ||
| Glass | DMAEMA | SI-ATRP | ||
| Glass, PDMS, silicon wafer | DMAEMA, NIPAAm | SI-RAFT | ||
| Cellulose paper | DMAEMA | SI-RAFT | ||
| Stainless steel | DMAEMA | SI-NMP | ||
| Stainless steel | EA, PTEA, 8QA | SI-NMP | ||
| Stainless steel | 4VP | SI-ATRP | ||
| Stainless steel | DMAEMA | SI-ATRP | ||
| Stainless steel | BPEA, FAc | SI-ATRP | ||
| Stainless steel | DMAEMA | SI-ATRP | ||
| Fe3O4 magnetite nanoparticle | DMAEMA | SI-ATRP | ||
| Fe(acac)3 magnetite nanoparticle | 4VP | SI-ATRP | ||
| Titanium | HEMA | SI-ATRP | ||
| Gold, Si/SiO2 surface | SPMA | SI-ATRP | ||
| Silicon wafer | DMAEMA | SI-ATRP | ||
| Silicon wafer, gold-coated silicon wafer, glass, cellulose acetate, silicon nanowire array, PU, PDMS, stainless steel | P(AA-co-Ada), PAH | SI-RAFT | ||
| Silicon rubber | AAm | SI-ATRP | ||
| Silicon rubber | AAm | SI-ATRP | ||
| Silicon nanowire array | DMAEMA | SI-ATRP | ||
| Silicon catheter | DMAEMA | SI-ATRP | ||
| PVDF membrane | DMAEMA | SI-RAFT | ||
| PVDF membrane | DMAEMA | SI-ATRP | ||
| Polymer microsphere | DMAEMA | SI-ATRP | ||
| Polyolefin | TBAEMA | SI-ATRP | ||
| Polyolefin | PB | SI-NMP | NM | |
| Polypropylene | DMAEMA | SI-ATRP | ||
| Polypropylene | TBAEMA | SI-ATRP | ||
| Polypropylene | DMAEMA | SI-ATRP | ||
| Microfiber | DMAEMA | SI-ATRP | ||
| Laponite clay platelet | DEPN | SI-NMP | NM |
Fig. 5Representative quaternary ammonium-based antimicrobial coatings prepared by controlled radical polymerization (CRP). ATRP: atom transfer radical polymerization; CTA: chain transfer agent; DMAEMA: 2-(dimethylamino)ethyl methacrylate; NMP: nitroxide-medited polymerization; RAFT: reversible addition fragmentation chain transfer; SINMP: surface initiated nitroxide-medited polymerization. [123], Copyright 2004.
Typical biomaterials grafted with QA-based polymers via ring-opening polymerization (ROP).
| Products | Microorganisms tested | Refs. |
|---|---|---|
| PEG/quaternary copolyoxetanes | ||
| Polycarbonate hydrogels | ||
| QPGMA polymers | ||
| PAMAM dendrimers | ||
| Silica nanoparticles |
Fig. 6Representative biomaterials grafted with QA-based polymers via ring-opening polymerization (ROP). A. Synthesis of nitric oxide (NO)-releasing QA-functionalized silica nanoparticles. B. Schematic illustration of nitric oxide (NO)-releasing QA-functionalized silica nanoparticles. [174], Copyright 2012.
Fig. 7Schematic illustration of reactions that best meet the criteria for a click reaction. A. Cu(I)-catalyzed azide–alkyne cycloaddition (CuAAC); B. Cu-free click cycloaddition; C. thiol–ene reaction. [183], Copyright 2011.
Fig. 8Representative quaternary ammonium-based antimicrobial surfaces prepared by Cu-catalyzed azide–alkyne cycloaddition (CuAAC). A. Synthesis of antimicrobial surfaces. B. Stained (live/dead stain) surfaces after 24 h of incubation with Staphylococcus aureus and Escherichia coli. S1, pristine surface; S3, quaternary ammonium-based surfaces. Cells with green fluorescence indicate live bacteria colonizing the surface, while dead cells exhibit red fluorescence. C. Schematic representation of the antimicrobial activity of the QA surfaces. [188], Copyright 2015. (For interpretation of the references to colour in this figure legend, the reader is referred to the web version of this article.)
Fig. 9Representative quaternary ammonium-based antimicrobial surfaces prepared by Cu-free click cycloaddition. A. Schematic of the synthesis of quaternary ammonium-functionalized quantum dots (QA-QDs). B. Representative scanning electron microscopy images of Escherichia coli incubated without (A–C) and with QPA-QDs for 20 min (D–F). C. Optical phase contrast images of cells double-stained with acridine orange and propidium iodide (AO/PI), after culturing with HepG2, A549, and HUVEC–C cells for 20 min with QPA-QDs (400× magnification). Cells with green fluorescence indicate live cells, while dead cells displayed red fluorescence. [194], Copyright 2016. (For interpretation of the references to colour in this figure legend, the reader is referred to the web version of this article.)
Fig. 10Synthesis of sulfabetaine/quaternary ammonium modified, hyperbranched polyglycerols (HPGs) via ultraviolet light-initiated thiol-ene “click” chemistry. [197], Copyright 2016.
Quaternary ammonium-based biomedical materials, QA-based nanoparticles, and the combination of QACs and nanomaterials.
| Applications | QACs | Microorganisms tested | Antibacterial methodologies | Details | Refs. | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Orthopedics-related materials | Bone cements | QADMA | Agar diffusion test, bacteria viability (colony counts), SEM | QADMA-modified bone cement showed contact killing antimicrobial properties without releasing any bioactive agents. | ||
| QAMA | Agar diffusion test, bacteria viability (colony counts), SEM | Inclusion of QAMA produced bone cements with antibacterial properties, lowered polymerization exotherm and comparable mechanical properties without evoking any cytotoxic response. | ||||
| TPGDA | Bacteria viability (colony counts), agar diffusion test | The novel dendritic structures showed promise for clinical antimicrobial activity while retaining the mechanical properties of bone cements. | ||||
| HACC | Clinical isolate | Biofilm inhibition test, bacteria viability (colony counts) fluores, SEM, Real-time PCR, rabbit model, bacteria viability (colony counts) | PMMA bone cements loaded with HACC exhibited improved surface roughness and wettability, increased porosity and better attachment and spreading of human-marrow-derived mesenchymal stem cells on the cement surface. These cements also prevented bacterial biofilm formation and exhibited improved physical properties and better osteogenic activity than gentamicin-loaded PMMA. In a rabbit model, HACC-loaded PMMA inhibits | |||
| QCS NPs | Bacteria viability (colony counts), biofilm inhibition test | Incorporation of the NPs in bone cements resulted in effective antibacterial action, and enhanced the antibacterial efficacy of gentamicin-loaded bone cements without compromising mechanical properties or causing cytotoxicity. | ||||
| QPEI NPs | Direct contact test, agar diffusion test | Incorporation of QPEI nanoparticles in bone cements had a long-lasting antibacterial effect without compromising the cement’s biocompatibility and physical properties. | ||||
| Titanium implant coatings | HACC | Bacterial viability (colony counts), rat model, SEM, CLSM | The antibacterial implant coating decreased infection rates associated with orthopedic implantation and promotes implant osseointegration. | |||
| Wound dressing materials | Sutures | 2AE | Bacterial viability (colony counts), agar diffusion test | The modified keratin substrate exhibited a multifunctional effect including antibacterial and antistatic properties, improved liquid moisture management property, improved dyeing ability and a non-leaching characteristic of the treated substrate. | ||
| K21 | Agar diffusion test | K21-coated surgical sutures exhibited antimicrobial activity for bacterial species of direct relevance to postoperative infection and bacteremia. | ||||
| IDMA | Agar diffusion test | The modified wool fabric showed good antibacterial and antistatic properties. Its mechanical properties were improved by the chemical bonds of the modification. | ||||
| Cotton fibers | SPH, SPODA | Agar diffusion test | The cotton fabric coated with both SPH and SPODA exhibited antibacterial activity. | |||
| GTAC, GTAC + AgNPs | Bacterial viability (colony counts), agar diffusion test | Cotton fibers treated chemically with GTAC and coated with AgNPs exhibited increased antibacterial efficacy, enhanced hydrophilicity but lower heat stability. | ||||
| Wound dressings and hydrogels | pDADMAC | Bacterial viability (colony counts), CLSM, SEM, bacterial migration test | The modified dressing inhibited growth and migration of bacteria. | |||
| GTEACl | Agar diffusion test, shaking flask test | The polyurethane membranes with appropriate loading of GTEACl showed biocompatibility, antibacterial activity, and possessed appropriate hydrophilicity and water vapor transmission rate. | ||||
| EPSiQA | MIC determination | EPSiQA-gelatin had excellent antibacterial property. | ||||
| Monomer 1 | Bacterial viability (colony counts), FE-SEM | The quaternized hydrogels showed fast degradation at room temperature, with broad-spectrum antimicrobial activity. These properties made the modified hydrogels ideal candidates for wound healing and implantable biomaterials. | ||||
| GTMAC | Shaking flask test, bacterial viability (colony counts), rat wound model | The efficiency in wound healing of the gel rendered it a promising material for treatment of full-thickness open wound. | ||||
| Dental materials | Resin composites | MDPB | Agar diffusion test, bacteria viability (colony counts) | Resin composites with MDPB after curing possessed antibacterial activity on contact against bacteria, with no adverse effects on mechanical properties and curing performance. | ||
| QPEI NPs | Direct contact test, agar diffusion test, | QPEI nanoparticles immobilized resin composite exhibited strong and long-lasting | ||||
| QADM/DMADDM/DMAHDM + NACP | Human saliva, rat saliva | Dental plaque microcosm model, MIC and MBC determination, biofilm accumulation (MTT), bacteria viability (colony counts) fluores, biofilm inhibition test, rat tooth cavity model | The nanocomposite exhibited antibacterial and remineralization potential | |||
| QADM + AgNPs + NACP | Biofilm accumulation (MTT), bacteria viability (colony counts) | The QADM + AgNPs + NACP composite possessed the double benefits of remineralization and antibacterial capabilities. The composite was found to be potentially useful for inhibiting dental caries with no adverse effects on mechanical properties. The anti-biofilm activity was maintained after 12 months of water-aging. | ||||
| QADM | CLSM | Incorporation of 10 wt% QADM reduced bacterial colonization, and increased the viscosity, degree of conversion and surface charge density. | ||||
| DDMAI | MIC determination, bacteria viability (colony counts), SEM | Incorporation of 5% DDMAI had no adverse effect on the conversion and flexural strength of the resin composite and provided radio-opaque and antibacterial effects. | ||||
| QADMAIs | Agar diffusion test, biofilm inhibition test | QADMAIs had no adverse impact on the degree of conversion and flexural strength. However, antibacterial activity, flexural strength, flexural modulus and radio-opacity were affected by the alky chain length of QAC. | ||||
| MAE-DB | Bacteria viability (colony counts), biofilm inhibition, RT-PCR | MAE-DB-containing resin blends exhibited long-term antibacterial effects after polymerization by attenuating | ||||
| IPhene | Biofilm inhibition test | Incorporation of 30 wt% IPhene endowed dental resins with both antibacterial and radio-opacity, with lower flexural strength and modulus, lower volumetric shrinkage and higher fracture energy. | ||||
| QAB | MIC determination, bacteria viability (colony counts) | QAB-modified composites showed significant antibacterial activity. However, mechanical strength was reduced. | ||||
| Monomer II | Biofilm inhibition test, FE-SEM | Resin composite containing 3% of monomer II significantly reduced against | ||||
| QASM | Agar diffusion test, direct contact test | Thiol–ene rich resins produced low shrinkage, homogeneous networks with adequate water uptake. Bactericidal activity was present on the matrix surface without sacrificing the physico-mechanical properties of the cured resin. | ||||
| IMQ-16 | Biofilm Inhibition test, agar diffusion test, direct contact test | Incorporation of IMQ-16 into resin provided significant antibacterial activity and equivalent physicochemical properties. | ||||
| Dental adhesives | MDPB | Agar diffusion test, bacterial viability (colony counts), MIC and MBC determination, biofilm accumulation, direct contact test, microcosm biofilm model, dog model, | Antibacterial adhesive or primer containing MDPB before curing acted as effective cavity disinfectants to directly kill bacteria. After polymerization, the adhesive or primer exhibited long-lasting contact inhibition effects on bacteria contacting the cured surface, without diffusion of soluble components, or significant decline in bond strength or curing performance. | |||
| DMAE-CB | Bacteria viability (colony counts), biofilm accumulation, RT-PCR, MIC and MBC determination, SEM | The modified dental adhesive had strong and long-lasting contact antibacterial activity after polymerization without negatively influencing bonding ability. | ||||
| DMAHDM, | Bacteria viability (colony counts), biofilm inhibition test, SEM, EPS Staining, pH Measurement, RT-PCR | Increasing the alkyl chain length and quaternary amine charge density of dentin bonding agent resin greatly enhanced antibacterial and anti-biofilm activity without compromising dentin bond strength. | ||||
| QAMP | MIC and MBC determination, bacteria viability (colony counts), agar diffusion test | The use of QAMP in an adhesive system demonstrated effective bond strength, acceptable degree of conversion, and long-lasting antibacterial effects. | ||||
| MDPB + AgNPs | Human saliva | Dental plaque microcosm model, bacteria viability (colony counts), agar diffusion test | Dual agents (MDPB + AgNPs) method yielded potent antibacterial properties without reducing dentin bond strength. | |||
| QADM + AgNPs | Bacteria viability (colony counts) fluores, biofilm inhibition test, RT-PCR, dental plaque microcosm model, agar diffusion test and inhibitory effects, TEM | Adhesive containing QADM and AgNPs had long-distance killing capability and inhibited bacteria on contact and away from its surface, without adversely affecting bond strength. Potential to inhibit secondary caries. | ||||
| DMADDM + NACP | Human saliva | Dental plaque microcosm model, bacteria viability (colony counts), biofilm inhibition test | Bonding agent containing DMADDM and NACP inhibited biofilms and dramatically increased the Ca and P ion release at cariogenic pH 4, without affecting dentin bond strength. | |||
| GICs and resin modified GICs | PQAS | MIC determination, bacteria viability (colony counts) | The cement exhibited long-lasting antibacterial activity and high mechanical strength, indicating its clinical potential. | |||
| DMADDM | Human saliva, | The cement strongly inhibited | ||||
| QPEI NPs | Direct contact test, agar diffusion test | QPEI nanoparticles when incorporated in GICs at a low concentration (1%) exhibited strong antibacterial effect that lasted for at least one month. | ||||
| Root canal sealers | MDPB | Root canal infection model, bacteria viability (colony counts), bacterial adherence, MIC and MBC determination, agar diffusion test | The root canal filling system had the ability to effectively disinfect infected root canals and achieved good sealing. | |||
| QAES NPs | Direct contact test, biofilm inhibition test, bacteria viability (colony counts) | The root canal sealer possessed long-lasting antibacterial activity for both planktonic bacteria and biofilms. | ||||
| QPEI NPs | Direct contact test, membrane-restricted experiments, biofilm inhibition test, agar diffusion test, SEM | Addition of QPEI NPs improved the long-term antibacterial activity of root canal sealers without relevant changes in physicochemical and mechanical properties. | ||||
| Pit-and-fissure sealants | DMAE-CB | Bacteria viability (colony counts) | Incorporation of DMAE-CB provided the sealant with contact-liking antibacterial activity without negatively influencing physicochemical and mechanical properties. | |||
| MAE-DB | Bacteria viability (colony counts), CLSM | Incorporation of MAE-DB rendered the sealant with contact antibacterial activity after polymerization by influencing the growth, adherence and membrane integrity of | ||||
| Pulp capping materials | MAE-DB | Bacteria viability (colony counts), biofilm accumulation | Pulp capping materials with strong and long-lasting contact-killing antibacterial activity | |||
| Acrylic resin | QAMS | Bacterial viability (colony counts), CLSM, RCT | QAMS-containing acrylic resins exhibited long-lasting antimicrobial activities, decreased water wettability and improved toughness, without adversely affecting the flexural strength and modulus, water sorption and solubility. The acrylic resin had the potential for preventing bacteria- and fungus-induced stomatitis. | |||
| MUPB | MIC and MBC determination, bacterial viability (colony counts), bacterial adherence | Antimicrobial activity of MUPB after incorporation in a denture base acrylic resin was not dependent on elution of the antimicrobial monomer. Incorporation of MUPB slightly reduced the mechanical properties of denture base acrylic resin. | ||||
| QCS | Bacterial viability (colony counts) | Chitosan quaternary ammonium salt-modified resin denture base materials showed antimicrobial properties, without significant reduction in their tensile strength and cytotoxicity. | ||||
| Dental implants | DCAMA | Bacterial adherence, CLSM | The coatings demonstrated antibacterial activity against bacteria adherent to the surface but exhibited poor cyto-compatibility. | |||
Fig. 11A. Cytoskeletal morphology of human mesenchymal stem cells (hMSCs) exposed to different polymethyl methacrylate (PMMA)-based bone cements. B. Relative alkaline phosphatase activity (indicative of bone forming potential) of hMSCs after 6, 10, and 14 days of culture. For each time period, columns connected with a horizontal bar are not significantly different (P > 0.05). C. Representative images showing hMSCs with positive alkaline phosphatase staining on the four PMMA-based bone cements at day 14. PMMA-C: chitosan-loaded PMMA; PMMA-G: gentamicin-loaded PMMA; PMMA-H: hydroxypropyltrimethyl ammonium chloride chitosan (HACC)-loaded PMMA. [210], Copyright 2012.
Fig. 12Representative scanning electron microscopy images of A. Untreated cotton; B. Cotton treated with silver nanoparticles (AgNPs). C. Cotton treated cotton with quaternary ammonium compound. D. Cotton treated with quaternary ammonium compound and AgNPs. [219], Copyright 2016.
Fig. 13Antibacterial activity of polymerized dental adhesives containing MDPB or DMAE-CB. A-C. Representative confocal laser scanning microscopy images of Streptococcus mutans adhered on the control adhesive (A), adhesive containing MDPB (B) and adhesive containing DMAE-CB (C) after 24-h incubation. Bacteria with integral membranes were stained with green fluorescence and those with compromised membranes were stained with red fluorescence. D. Fluorescence intensity values of the two channels for adhesives derived from the three groups. E. Schematic representation of polymerized adhesive containing DMAE-CB. F-H. Representative scanning electron microscopy images of Streptococcus mutans biofilms on the control adhesive (F), adhesive containing MDPB (G) and adhesive containing DMAE-CB (H) after 4-h incubation. I-K. Representative scanning electron microscopy images of Streptococcus mutans biofilms on the control adhesive (I), adhesive containing MDPB (J) and adhesive containing DMAE-CB (K) after 24-h incubation. [260], Copyright 2009. (For interpretation of the references to colour in this figure legend, the reader is referred to the web version of this article.)
Fig. 14Evaluation of antibacterial and remineralizing nanocomposite and adhesive containing nanoparticles of amorphous calcium phosphate (NACP) and dimethylaminododecyl methacrylate (DMADDM) in a rat tooth cavity model. A. Schematic representation of rat tooth cavity model. B. Rat right and left molar teeth were used. C. Occlusal cavity was prepared. D. Cavity was restored with adhesive and nanocomposite and light-cured. E-H. Histological analyses of rat tooth cavities at 8 days in the control group (E and F) and the DMADDM + NACP group (G and H). The same four groups at a higher magnification. The control group exhibited disruption of the odontoblast layer associated with a medium inflammatory response in the pulp. Blood vessels are observed and a thin layer of tertiary dentin can be identified. The DMADDM + NACP group has normal pulp tissues, with much thicker tertiary dentin (a type of reparative dentin) than the control. Stars indicate areas with inflammatory cell infiltration. I and J. Representative hematoxylin and eosin-stained images at 30 days in control group (I) and the DMADDM + NACP group (J). Stars indicate areas with inflammatory cells. Blood vessels are indicated by arrows. The control group exhibits slight inflammatory responses. The DMADDM + NACP group shows normal pulp tissue without inflammatory response, and greater tertiary dentin thickness. [234], Copyright 2014.
Fig. 15Randomized clinical trial on the in vivo antimicrobial efficacy of quaternary ammonium methacryloxy siloxane (QAMS)-containing orthodontic acrylic. A. Schematic illustrating the relationship between a test disk and its fitting well within the retainer appliance. The disk surface to be examined was turned toward the palate but not in direct contact with the palate. Each well was protected from the oral cavity by orthodontic acrylic to prevent disturbance of the biofilm by the tongue. B. Each appliance contained 4 wells to house two 6-mm diameter retrievable control disks and 2 similar diameter retrievable experimental PMMA disks (containing 5 wt% QAMS). C. BacLight-stained confocal laser scanning microscopy merged image showing the presence of live (green) bacteria and fungal hyphae (open arrowhead) within the biovolume of a biofilm taken from a control disk of one subject. D. The corresponding BacLight-stained merged image showing the presence of dead (red) bacteria and fungal hyphae killed by the QAMS-containing acrylic from an experimental disk of the same subject. [291], Copyright 2016. (For interpretation of the references to colour in this figure legend, the reader is referred to the web version of this article.)
Fig. 16Schematic representation of the interface between a nanoparticle and the lipid bilayer of a cell membrane. The nano-bio interface comprises the surface of the nanoparticle; the solid-liquid interface and the effects of the surrounding medium; and the interface’s contact zone with biological substrates.
Fig. 17Pathways and mechanisms of antimicrobial resistance in quaternary ammonium compounds (QACs). Bacteria compensate for exposure to QACs at sub-minimal inhibitory conditions via SOS-response and stress-response sigma factors rpoS-induction. These factors, in turn, induce modifications in bacteria cell physiology that result in the development QAC resistance. These modifications include induction of QAC biodegradation, enhanced biofilm formation, modifications in cell membrane via reduced expression of porins, acquisition of efflux genes such as plasmids, transposon or integrons, and over-expression of efflux pumps which helps remove antimicrobial agents from the inside of a bacterial cell with high extrusion efficiency. These modifications help reduce or restrict QAC-induced contact-killing. [394], Copyright 2009.