College of Dental Medicine, University of Sharjah, Sharjah, UAE.
School of Dental Sciences, Universiti Sains Malaysia Health Campus, Kubang Kerian, Kelantan, Malaysia.
PLoS One. 2020 Nov 3;15(11):e0241519. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0241519. eCollection 2020.
Silver diamine fluoride (SDF) is commonly used to arrest caries lesions, especially in early childhood caries. Recently, it was suggested that SDF can be combined with potassium iodide (KI) to minimize the discoloration of demineralized dentine associated with SDF application. However, the antibacterial efficacy of SDF alone or combined with KI on in-situ biofilm is unknown. Hence, we compared the anti-plaque biofilm efficacy of two different commercially available SDF solutions, with or without KI, using an in-situ biofilm, analysed using viability real-time PCR with propidium monoazide (PMA). Appliance-borne in-situ biofilm samples (n = 90) were grown for a period of 6 h in five healthy subjects who repeated the experiment on three separate occasions, using a validated, novel, intraoral device. The relative anti-biofilm efficacy of two SDF formulations; 38.0% Topamine (SDFT) and 31.3%, Riva Star (SDFR), KI alone, and KI in combination with SDFR (SDFR+KI) was compared. The experiments were performed by applying an optimized volume of the agents onto the biofilm for 1min, mimicking the standard clinical procedure. Afterwards the viability of the residual biofilm bacteria was quantified using viability real-time PCR with PMA, then the percentage of viable from total bacteria was calculated. Both SDF formulations (SDFT and SDFR) exhibited potent antibacterial activities against the in-situ biofilm; however, there was non-significant difference in their efficacy. KI alone did not demonstrate any antibacterial effect, and there was non-significant difference in the antibacterial efficacy of SDF alone compared to SDF with KI, (SDFT v SDFR/KI). Thus, we conclude that the antibacterial efficacy of SDF against plaque biofilms is not modulated by KI supplements. Viability real-time PCR with PMA was successfully used to analyze the viability of naturally grown oral biofilm; thus, the same method can be used to test the antimicrobial effect of other agents on oral biofilms in future research.
银胺氟化物(SDF)常用于阻止龋病病变,尤其是在幼儿龋病中。最近,有人提出 SDF 可以与碘化钾(KI)结合使用,以最大限度地减少 SDF 应用相关的脱矿质牙本质的变色。然而,SDF 单独或与 KI 结合使用对原位生物膜的抗菌效果尚不清楚。因此,我们使用原位生物膜,通过实时 PCR 结合吖啶橙(PMA)分析,比较了两种不同市售 SDF 溶液(含或不含 KI)的抗菌斑生物膜效果。在 5 名健康受试者中,使用经过验证的新型口腔内设备,在 6 小时内培养了可佩戴的原位生物膜样本(n=90)。每位受试者在三个不同时间点重复了该实验。两种 SDF 制剂的相对抗生物膜效果;38.0% Topamine(SDFT)和 31.3%,Riva Star(SDFR),KI 单独使用,以及 KI 与 SDFR 联合使用(SDFR+KI)进行了比较。通过将优化体积的试剂施加到生物膜上 1 分钟来进行实验,模拟标准临床程序。然后使用实时 PCR 结合 PMA 定量残留生物膜细菌的活力,然后计算总细菌中存活细菌的百分比。两种 SDF 制剂(SDFT 和 SDFR)均对原位生物膜表现出强大的抗菌活性;然而,它们的功效没有显著差异。KI 单独使用时没有显示出任何抗菌作用,SDF 单独使用与 SDF 与 KI 联合使用相比,其抗菌效果也没有显著差异(SDFT 与 SDFR/KI)。因此,我们得出结论,SDF 对菌斑生物膜的抗菌效果不受 KI 补充剂的调节。实时 PCR 结合 PMA 成功地用于分析自然生长的口腔生物膜的活力;因此,在未来的研究中,可以使用相同的方法测试其他试剂对口腔生物膜的抗菌效果。