Comparison of Antibacterial Adhesion When Salivary Pellicle Is Coated on Both Poly(2-hydroxyethyl-methacrylate)- and Polyethylene-glycol-methacrylate-grafted Poly(methyl methacrylate)

Abstract

Although poly(2-hydroxyethyl methacrylate) (pHEMA) and polyethylene glycol methacrylate (PEGMA) have been demonstrated to inhibit bacterial adhesion, no study has compared antibacterial adhesion when salivary pellicle is coated on polymethyl methacrylate (PMMA) grafted with pHEMA and on PMMA grafted with PEGMA. In this study, PMMA discs were fabricated from a commercial orthodontic acrylic resin system (Ortho-Jet). Attenuated total reflection-Fourier transform infrared spectra taken before and after grafting confirmed that pHEMA and PEGMA were successfully grafted on PMMA. Contact angle measurements revealed PMMA-pHEMA to be the most hydrophilic, followed by PMMA-PEGMA, and then by PMMA. Zeta potential analysis revealed the most negative surface charges on PMMA-PEGMA, followed by PMMA-pHEMA, and then by PMMA. Confocal laser scanning microscopy showed green fluorescence in the background, indicating images that influenced the accuracy of the quantification of live bacteria. Both the optical density value measured at 600 nm and single plate-serial dilution spotting showed that pHEMA was more effective than PEGMA against Escherichia coli and Streptococcus mutans, although the difference was not significant. Therefore, the grafting of pHEMA and PEGMA separately on PMMA is effective against bacterial adhesion, even after the grafted PMMA were coated with salivary pellicle. Surface hydrophilicity, bactericidality, and Coulomb repulsion between the negatively charged bacteria and the grafted surface contributed to the effectiveness.

Synthesis and Evaluation of AlgNa-g-Poly(QCL-co-HEMA) Hydrogels as Platform for Chondrocyte Proliferation and Controlled Release of Betamethasone

“…Signals at 1080, 1025, and 813 cm −1 correspond to stretching vibrations of asymmetric and symmetric -C-O-C and Na-O, respectively [ 28 ]. Both monomers employed have C = O and C = C groups in their structure whose characteristic peaks are observed at 1718 and 1636 cm −1 in the QCL spectra ( Figure 2 b) [ 29 , 30 ] and at 1711 and 1636 cm −1 in the case of HEMA ( Figure 2 c) [ 31 , 32 ]. In the QCL spectrum, other characteristic peaks are also observed at 1478 and 1185 cm −1 , which are attributed to the bending band of quaternary ammonium groups (-N + (CH 3 ) 3 ) and the C-O of ester, respectively [ 29 , 33 ].…”

Synthesis and evaluation of AlgNa-g-poly(QCL-co-HEMA) hydrogels for cartilage tissue engineering and controlled release of betamethasone.

“…Signals at 1080, 1025 and 813 cm -1 correspond to stretching vibrations of asymmetric and symmetric -C-O-C, and Na-O respectively [24]. Both monomers employed have C = O and C = C groups in their structure whose characteristic peaks are observed at 1718 and 1636 cm -1 in the QCL spectra (figure 2b) [25,26] and at 1711 and 1636 cm -1 in case of HEMA (figure 2c) [27,28]. In the QCL spectrum, other characteristic peaks are also observed at 1478 and 1185 cm -1 attributed to the bending band of quaternary ammonium groups (-N + (CH3)3) and C-O of ester, respectively [25,29].…”

The Impact of Early Saliva Interaction on Dental Implants and Biomaterials for Oral Regeneration: An Overview

“…Equivalent results were shown for biomaterials manufactured for oral regeneration, such as modified membranes or hydroxyapatite substitutes [76][77][78][79]. The salivary film deposited over the biomaterial surface can mediate the adhesion of important bacteria present in oral infections [68,78].…”

“…Moreover, organic biomaterials may promote a favorable environment for bacterial metabolism due to the degradation of specific molecules compared to inorganic biomaterials or synthetic biomaterials [76]. On the other hand, Lee et al [79] revealed, using in vitro models, that their PMMA membranes possess antibacterial Promising features for dental implant surfaces have been reported to control bacterial proliferation with the application of nanotexturizations or antibiotic-loaded surfaces [72,73], suggesting a protective coating for contaminated environments. However, preclinical and clinical studies are rare regarding assays with saliva-contaminated implants associated with innovative surface treatments.…”

“…Moreover, organic biomaterials may promote a favorable environment for bacterial metabolism due to the degradation of specific molecules compared to inorganic biomaterials or synthetic biomaterials [76]. On the other hand, Lee et al [79] revealed, using in vitro models, that their PMMA membranes possess antibacterial properties even after contamination with saliva. Studies applying saliva-contaminated biomaterials are scarce in the literature due to the associated negative effects, mainly in animal models and clinical models where the tissues can be damaged with these bacteria.…”