A Novel Device for the Evaluation of In Vitro Bacterial Colonization in Membranes for Guided Tissue and Bone Regeneration

Overview

Journal Dent J (Basel)

Specialty Dentistry

Date 2024 Jul 26

PMID 39056989

Authors

Ana Clara Kuerten Gil

Eugenio A D Merino

Diogo Pontes Costa

Cesar Nunes Giracca

Ricardo Mazzon

Gabriel Leonardo Magrin

Josiane de Almeida

Cesar Augusto Magalhaes Benfatti

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

To evaluate, in vitro, the efficiency of a novel apparatus to test the adherence and penetration of bacteria on different membranes for guided regeneration. To create the 3D device, Computer Aided Design/Computer Aided Manufacturing (CAD/CAM) systems were used. Three types of biomaterials were tested ( = 6): (DT) a collagen membrane; (DS) a polymer membrane; and (LP) a dense polytetrafluoroethylene barrier. The biomaterials were adapted to the apparatuses and challenged with two different monospecies bacterial culture of and . After 2 h, bacterial adherence and penetration were quantified by counting the number of colony-forming units (CFUs). Two specimens from each group were used for image analysis using Confocal Laser Scanning Microscopy. Statistical analysis was performed. The DS group had a higher adherence of compared to ( = 0.05). There was less adherence of in the DS group, compared to the LP ( = 0.011) and DT ( < 0.001) groups. Only the membranes allowed penetration, which was blocked by barriers. The DT group allowed a greater penetration of to occur compared to ( = 0.009), which showed a higher penetration into the DS membranes compared to ( = 0.016). The penetration of through DS was higher compared to its penetration through DT and LP ( < 0.01 for both). DT and DS allowed a greater penetration of to occur compared to LP, which prevented both bacterial species from penetrating. The apparatus allowed for the settlement and complete sealing of the biomaterials, enabling standardization.

Citing Articles

The Microbial Diversity and Biofilm Characteristics of d-PTFE Membranes Used for Socket Preservation: A Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial.

Franovic B, candrlic M, Blaskovic M, Renko I, Komar Milas K, Markova-Car E J Funct Biomater. 2025; 16(2).

PMID: 39997574 PMC: 11856730. DOI: 10.3390/jfb16020040.

References

Milella E, Ramires P, Brescia E, La Sala G, Di Paola L, Bruno V . Physicochemical, mechanical, and biological properties of commercial membranes for GTR. J Biomed Mater Res. 2001; 58(4):427-35. DOI: 10.1002/jbm.1038. View

Wang H, Yuan K, Burgett F, Shyr Y, Syed S . Adherence of oral microorganisms to guided tissue membranes: an in vitro study. J Periodontol. 1994; 65(3):211-8. DOI: 10.1902/jop.1994.65.3.211. View

Nowzari H, MacDonald E, Flynn J, London R, Morrison J, Slots J . The dynamics of microbial colonization of barrier membranes for guided tissue regeneration. J Periodontol. 1996; 67(7):694-702. DOI: 10.1902/jop.1996.67.7.694. View

Nocca G, Filetici P, Bugli F, Mordente A, DAddona A, Dassatti L . Permeability of P. gingivalis or its metabolic products through collagen and dPTFE membranes and their effects on the viability of osteoblast-like cells: an in vitro study. Odontology. 2022; 110(4):710-718. DOI: 10.1007/s10266-022-00705-9. View

Zhang X, Zhang Q, Yan T, Jiang Z, Zhang X, Zuo Y . Quantitatively predicting bacterial adhesion using surface free energy determined with a spectrophotometric method. Environ Sci Technol. 2015; 49(10):6164-71. PMC: 4854535. DOI: 10.1021/es5050425. View

Hung S, Lin Y, Wang Y, Chen Y, Su C, Ling L . Permeability of Streptococcus mutans and Actinobacillus actinomycetemcomitans Through guided tissue regeneration membranes and their effects on attachment of periodontal ligament cells. J Periodontol. 2002; 73(8):843-51. DOI: 10.1902/jop.2002.73.8.843. View

Gil A, Prado M, Rocha L, Benfatti C, Schuldt Filho G, de Almeida J . In vitro evaluation of membranes for regenerative procedures against oral bacteria. Braz Dent J. 2023; 34(3):57-65. PMC: 10355258. DOI: 10.1590/0103-6440202305060. View

Lian M, Sun B, Qiao Z, Zhao K, Zhou X, Zhang Q . Bi-layered electrospun nanofibrous membrane with osteogenic and antibacterial properties for guided bone regeneration. Colloids Surf B Biointerfaces. 2019; 176:219-229. DOI: 10.1016/j.colsurfb.2018.12.071. View

Xue J, Shi R, Niu Y, Gong M, Coates P, Crawford A . Fabrication of drug-loaded anti-infective guided tissue regeneration membrane with adjustable biodegradation property. Colloids Surf B Biointerfaces. 2015; 135:846-854. DOI: 10.1016/j.colsurfb.2015.03.031. View

10.

Toledano-Osorio M, Manzano-Moreno F, Ruiz C, Toledano M, Osorio R . Testing active membranes for bone regeneration: A review. J Dent. 2021; 105:103580. DOI: 10.1016/j.jdent.2021.103580. View

11.

Abe G, Tsuboi R, Kitagawa H, Sasaki J, Li A, Kohno T . Poly(lactic acid/caprolactone) bilayer membrane blocks bacterial penetration. J Periodontal Res. 2022; 57(3):510-518. DOI: 10.1111/jre.12980. View

12.

Vallecillo-Rivas M, Toledano-Osorio M, Vallecillo C, Toledano M, Osorio R . The Collagen Origin Influences the Degradation Kinetics of Guided Bone Regeneration Membranes. Polymers (Basel). 2021; 13(17). PMC: 8433692. DOI: 10.3390/polym13173007. View

13.

Cheng C, Wu K, Chen Y, Hung S . Bacterial adhesion to antibiotic-loaded guided tissue regeneration membranes - a scanning electron microscopy study. J Formos Med Assoc. 2013; 114(1):35-45. DOI: 10.1016/j.jfma.2013.07.010. View

14.

Gao Y, Wang S, Shi B, Wang Y, Chen Y, Wang X . Advances in Modification Methods Based on Biodegradable Membranes in Guided Bone/Tissue Regeneration: A Review. Polymers (Basel). 2022; 14(5). PMC: 8912280. DOI: 10.3390/polym14050871. View

15.

Ling L, Hung S, Lee C, Chen Y, Wu K . The influence of membrane exposure on the outcomes of guided tissue regeneration: clinical and microbiological aspects. J Periodontal Res. 2003; 38(1):57-63. DOI: 10.1034/j.1600-0765.2003.01641.x. View

16.

Alvarez S, Leiva-Sabadini C, Schuh C, Aguayo S . Bacterial adhesion to collagens: implications for biofilm formation and disease progression in the oral cavity. Crit Rev Microbiol. 2021; 48(1):83-95. DOI: 10.1080/1040841X.2021.1944054. View

17.

Barber H, Lignelli J, Smith B, Bartee B . Using a dense PTFE membrane without primary closure to achieve bone and tissue regeneration. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2007; 65(4):748-52. DOI: 10.1016/j.joms.2006.10.042. View

18.

Soldatos N, Stylianou P, Koidou V, Angelov N, Yukna R, Romanos G . Limitations and options using resorbable versus nonresorbable membranes for successful guided bone regeneration. Quintessence Int. 2016; 48(2):131-147. DOI: 10.3290/j.qi.a37133. View

19.

Simion M, Trisi P, Maglione M, Piattelli A . A preliminary report on a method for studying the permeability of expanded polytetrafluoroethylene membrane to bacteria in vitro: a scanning electron microscopic and histological study. J Periodontol. 1994; 65(8):755-61. DOI: 10.1902/jop.1994.65.8.755. View

20.

Rani S, Chandra R, Reddy A, Reddy B, Nagarajan S, Naveen A . Evaluation of the Antibacterial Effect of Silver Nanoparticles on Guided Tissue Regeneration Membrane Colonization--An in Vitro Study. J Int Acad Periodontol. 2015; 17(3):66-76. View