Antimicrobial Activity of Common Mouthwash Solutions on Multidrug-Resistance Bacterial Biofilms

Masadeh, Majed M; Gharaibeh, Shadi F.; Alzoubi, Karem H.; Al‐Azzam, Sayer; Obeidat, Wasfi M.

doi:10.4021/jocmr1535w

Cited by 31 publications

(39 citation statements)

References 29 publications

(30 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The matrix blocks direct contact between antibiotics and pathogens, significantly reducing the sensitivity of the antibiotics and causing multiple drug resistance in the oral pathogens (Kouidhi et al ). Although mouthwashes containing chlorhexidine, gluconate or cetylpyridinum chloride reduce the growth of oral bacteria, bacteria embedded in biofilms are more resistant to a mouthwash than those in the planktonic state (Masadeh et al ). Thus, probiotics are a promising alternative for treating dental biofilms and plaques (Mahasneh and Mahasneh ).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Antibacterial activity of viable and heat‐killed probiotic strains against oral pathogens

Chen

Hsieh

et al. 2020

Lett Appl Microbiol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Probiotics can stabilize gut flora, regulate intestinal immunity and protect the host from enteric diseases; however, their roles in oral health have received little attention compared to their roles in gut health. Nowadays, the prevalence of sugar‐sweetened foods and abuse of antibiotics contribute towards dysbiosis of oral microbiota and drug resistance development in oral pathogens, resulting in various intractable oral diseases. We screened the antibacterial activities of viable and heat‐killed probiotic strains against the oral pathogens Streptococcus mutans, Porphyromonas gingivalis, Fusobacterium nucleatum and Aggregatibacter actinomycetemcomitans. The probiotic strains Lactobacillus salivarius subsp. salicinius AP‐32, L. rhamnosus CT‐53, L. paracasei ET‐66 and Bifidobacterium animalis subsp. lactis CP‐9 displayed strong antipathogenic activities, whereas heat‐killed AP‐32, CT‐53 and ET‐66 displayed high levels of pathogen inhibition. The antibacterial activities of these probiotics were not associated with their H2O2 production; L. acidophilus TYCA02 produced high levels of H2O2 but merely exhibited moderate antibacterial activities. Oral tablets containing probiotics showed positive inhibitory effects against oral pathogens, particularly those containing viable probiotics. Our results indicate that probiotics prevent the growth of oral pathogens and improve oral health, providing insights into the antipathogenic efficacy of different probiotic species and their potential role in functional foods that improve oral health. Significance and Impact of the Study Our study provides insights into the antipathogenic efficacy of different probiotic species and their potential roles in developing functional foods to improve oral health. We showed that the probiotic strains Lactobacillus salivarius subsp. salicinius AP‐32, L. rhamnosus CT‐53, L. paracasei ET‐66 and Bifidobacterium animalis subsp. lactis CP‐9 have great potential for use in the development of functional foods to improve oral health. Since active probiotics may provide strong and long‐term protection, the development of functional food products should favour the use of viable bacteria.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Antibacterial activity of viable and heat‐killed probiotic strains against oral pathogens

Chen

Hsieh

et al. 2020

Lett Appl Microbiol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 98%

“…As is typical in most settings, bacteria in their biofilm state are less susceptible to chemical treatment (i.e. mouthwash solutions) compared with their planktonic state (Masadeh et al, 2013). Verkaik and colleagues (2010) compared the effectiveness of contact and non-contact brushing of different species in oral biofilms.…”

Section: An Application For Oral Biofilmsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Modelling mechanical and chemical treatment of biofilms with two phenotypic resistance mechanisms

Szomolay

Cogan

2015

Environmental Microbiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Bacterial biofilms are notoriously difficult to eradicate owing to a number of tolerance mechanisms including physiological, physical, genotypic and phenotypic variations. Recent focus has shifted to phenotypic tolerance which is apparently the main defence mechanism that protects biofilms against long-term disinfection. Previous mathematical models have addressed phenotypic dynamics by considering adaptive response and persister formation separately. The aim of this manuscript is to consider a combined model to understand the interplay between these two defence mechanisms. We find that each mechanism protects the biofilm differently and hence responds differently to antibiotic challenge. We focus on on-off dosing that has been shown to eradicate each subpopulation alone. Our results indicate that the combined resistance exhibits qualitatively similar behavior to persister formation for short dosing times, and similar behavior to adaptive resistance for long dosing times. To further contrast the behavior of the model under different parameter regimes, we explore two classes of combination treatment that include mechanical and chemical treatments. The examples focus on different applications - pipe clearance and dental carrie prevention - and demonstrate the underlying conclusion that adaptive and persister mechanism provide protection for different challenges and are thus not redundant systems and each may require specific treatment plans.

show abstract

“…Next the plates were incubated at 37°C for 48 hours and zones of growth inhibition against pathogenic species were measured. The procedure was repeated for freeze-dried supernatant to assure its stability during the Freeze-dried procedure (7,8).…”

Section: Antibacterial Evaluationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of Antibacterial Efficacy of Probiotic Mouthwash with Chlorhexidine Against Common Oral Pathogens: An In-Vitro Study

Saadatzadeh

Ameri

Moghimipour

et al. 2017

Jundishapur J Nat Pharm Prod

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: The basic method in prevention of oral disorders and hygiene of an oral cavity is control of plaque growth and germ accumulation on teeth and gingivae. Mouthwashes are most common topical solutions against plaque formation. Although there are many antimicrobial agents in use, only a few have shown clinical effectiveness. Furthermore, their long-term use may lead to several side effects. Therefore, utilizing natural antimicrobial agents such as probiotics may be an effective way to overcome the problem. The purpose of the present investigation was to design a mouthwash formulation containing probiotic extract.

show abstract

Antimicrobial Activity of Common Mouthwash Solutions on Multidrug-Resistance Bacterial Biofilms

Cited by 31 publications

References 29 publications

Antibacterial activity of viable and heat‐killed probiotic strains against oral pathogens

Antibacterial activity of viable and heat‐killed probiotic strains against oral pathogens

Modelling mechanical and chemical treatment of biofilms with two phenotypic resistance mechanisms

Comparison of Antibacterial Efficacy of Probiotic Mouthwash with Chlorhexidine Against Common Oral Pathogens: An In-Vitro Study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About