Effect of Sucrose Concentration on Streptococcus mutans Adhesion to Dental Material Surfaces
Source abstract
Abstract
Enamel demineralization, known as dental caries, is instigated by the bacterium Streptococcus mutans, which generates acid during carbohydrate metabolism. Among carbohydrates, sucrose is the most cariogenic and capable of biofilm formation. This study aimed to explore and comprehend Streptococcus mutans’ adherence to two prevalent dental material surfaces, i.e., a cobalt–chromium (Co-Cr) alloy and a resin-based composite, under the influence of various sucrose concentrations. To understand bacterial adhesion, the surfaces were characterized using profilometry, tensiometry, and surface charge measurements. Bacterial adhesion was evaluated using scanning electron microscopy and crystal violet dye methods. Results revealed that the composite surface exhibited greater roughness compared with the Co-Cr alloy surface. Both surfaces displayed hydrophilic properties and a negative surface charge. Bacterial adhesion experiments indicated lower bacterial adherence to the Co-Cr alloy than to the composite surface before the addition of sucrose. However, the introduction of sucrose resulted in biofilm development on both surfaces, showcasing a similar increase in bacterial adhesion, with the highest levels being observed at a 5% sucrose concentration in the bacterial suspension. In conclusion, the findings suggest sucrose-rich foods could facilitate bacterial adaptation despite less favorable surface characteristics, thereby promoting biofilm formation.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Oral microbiology and periodontitis research · Dental materials and restorations · Bacterial biofilms and quorum sensing
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Ljubljana, Zdravstvena 5, 1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia
Jozef Stefan Institute, Jamova 39, 1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia
Slovenian National Building and Civil Engineering Institute, 1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia
Faculty of Polymer Technology—FTPO, Ozare 19, 2380 Slovenj Gradec, Slovenia
References (46)
Show source-provided references
1. Bacterial Adhesion Mechanisms on Dental Implant Surfaces and the Influencing Factors10.1016/j.ijadhadh.2016.03.022 ↗
2. Sakaguchi, R.L., and Powers, J.M. (2012). Craig’s Restorative Dental Materials, Elsevier Mosby.
3. Dental Plaque Revisited: Bacteria Associated with Periodontal Disease
4. Prevalence of Secondary Caries Around Posterior Restoration
5. Detecting Secondary Caries Lesions10.1177/0022034515611041 ↗
6. Secondary Caries: A Literature Review with Case Reports
7. Silver–Polysaccharide Antimicrobial Nanocomposite Coating for Methacrylic Surfaces Reduces Streptococcus Mutans Biofilm Formation in Vitro10.1016/j.jdent.2015.10.006 ↗
8. Dental Caries: A Review
9. Dental Caries: From Infection to Prevention
10. Streptococcus Mutans, Caries and Simulation Models10.3390/nu2030290 ↗
11. An In Vivo Study of the Influence of the Surface Roughness of Implants on the Microbiology of Supra- and Subgingival Plaque10.1177/00220345930720090801 ↗
12. Forces Involved in Bacterial Adhesion to Hydrophilic and Hydrophobic Surfaces10.1099/mic.0.2008/018622-0 ↗
13. Bacterial Adhesion on Orthopedic Implants10.1016/j.cis.2020.102228 ↗
14. Biology of Oral Streptococci10.1128/microbiolspec.GPP3-0042-2018 ↗
15. The Biology of Streptococcus Mutans10.1128/microbiolspec.GPP3-0051-2018 ↗
16. Negrini, T.d.C., Ren, Z., Miao, Y., Kim, D., Simon-Soro, Á., Liu, Y., Koo, H., and Arthur, R.A. (2022). Dietary Sugars Modulate Bacterial-Fungal Interactions in Saliva and Inter-Kingdom Biofilm Formation on Apatitic Surface. Front. Cell. Infect. Microbiol., 12.10.3389/fcimb.2022.993640 ↗
17. Fejerskov, O., and Kidd, E.A.M. (2008). Dental Caries: The Disease and Its Clinical Management, Blackwell.
18. Cai, J.-N., Jung, J.-E., Dang, M.-H., Kim, M.-A., Yi, H.-K., and Jeon, J.-G. (2016). Functional Relationship between Sucrose and a Cariogenic Biofilm Formation. PLoS ONE, 11.10.1371/journal.pone.0157184 ↗
19. Grosgogeat, B., Vaicelyte, A., Gauthier, R., Janssen, C., and Le Borgne, M. (2022). Toxicological Risks of the Cobalt–Chromium Alloys in Dentistry: A Systematic Review. Materials, 15.10.3390/ma15175801 ↗
20. Physico-Mechanical Properties and Prosthodontic Applications of Co-Cr Dental Alloys: A Review of the Literature10.4047/jap.2014.6.2.138 ↗
21. Oral Health Status of Patients 5–6 Years after Placement of Cobalt-Chromium Removable Partial Dentures10.1046/j.1365-2842.2000.00512.x ↗
22. Bacterial Adhesion of Streptococcus Mutans to Cobalt Chromium Recast Alloys10.22146/majkedgiind.53329 ↗
23. Vaicelyte, A., Janssen, C., Le Borgne, M., and Grosgogeat, B. (2020). Cobalt–Chromium Dental Alloys: Metal Exposures, Toxicological Risks, CMR Classification, and EU Regulatory Framework. Crystals, 10.10.3390/cryst10121151 ↗
24. Comparison of the Mechanical Properties of Various Microhybrid Dental Composites
25. Adherence of Streptococcus Mutans to Microhybrid and Nanohybrid Resin Composites and Dental Amalgam: An In Vitro Study
26. Microhybrid versus Nanofill Composite in Combination with a Three Step Etch and Rinse Adhesive in Occlusal Cavities: Five Year Results10.5395/rde.2017.42.4.253 ↗
27. Adhesion and Initial Colonization of Streptococcus Mutans Is Influenced by Time and Composition of Different Composites10.4067/S0718-381X2018000400395 ↗
28. Clinical Efficacy of Resin-Based Direct Posterior Restorations and Glass-Ionomer Restorations—An Updated Meta-Analysis of Clinical Outcome Parameters10.1016/j.dental.2021.10.018 ↗
29. Nanofilled/Nanohybrid and Hybrid Resin-Based Composite in Patients with Direct Restorations in Posterior Teeth: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis10.1016/j.jdent.2020.103407 ↗
30. Resin Composite Class I Restorations: A 54-Month Randomized Clinical Trial10.2341/14-067-C ↗
31. Twenty-Four-Month Clinical Comparison of Two Bulk-Fill and a Microhybrid Composite Restorations in Class II Cavities
32. Ion Release from NiTi Orthodontic Wires in Artificial Saliva with Various Acidities10.1016/S0142-9612(03)00188-1 ↗
33. Suppression Effects of Dental Glass-Ceramics with Polarization-Induced Highly Dense Surface Charges against Bacterial Adhesion10.4012/dmj.2014-342 ↗
34. Effect of Surface Roughness and Materials Composition10.4236/jbnb.2012.324056 ↗
35. Kozmos, M., Virant, P., Rojko, F., Abram, A., Rudolf, R., Raspor, P., Zore, A., and Bohinc, K. (2021). Bacterial Adhesion of Streptococcus Mutans to Dental Material Surfaces. Molecules, 26.10.3390/molecules26041152 ↗
36. Effect of Material Characteristics and/or Surface Topography on Biofilm Development10.1111/j.1600-0501.2006.01353.x ↗
37. Influence of Finishing and Polishing Techniques and Abrasion on Transmittance and Roughness of Composite Resins10.2341/15-281-L ↗
38. Structural, Surface, in Vitro Bacterial Adhesion and Biofilm Formation Analysis of Three Dental Restorative Composites10.3390/ma8063221 ↗
39. The Role of Bacterial Cell Wall Hydrophobicity in Adhesion10.1128/aem.53.8.1893-1897.1987 ↗
40. Effects of Material Properties on Bacterial Adhesion and Biofilm Formation10.1177/0022034515587690 ↗
41. Cai, J.-N., Choi, H.-M., and Jeon, J.-G. (2021). Relationship between Sucrose Concentration and Bacteria Proportion in a Multispecies Biofilm. J. Oral Microbiol., 13.10.1080/20002297.2021.1910443 ↗
42. The Effects of Cell Immobilization, PH and Sucrose on the Growth of Listeria Monocytogenes Scott A at 10 °C10.1016/S0740-0020(02)00083-7 ↗
43. Antibiotic Resistance of Bacterial Biofilms10.1016/j.ijantimicag.2009.12.011 ↗
44. Antibiotic Resistance of Bacteria in Biofilms10.1016/S0140-6736(01)05321-1 ↗
45. Oral Colonization by Streptococcus Mutans and Its Association with the Severity of Periodontal Disease in Adults10.1016/S0718-5391(11)70058-1 ↗
46. Assessment of Streptococcus Mutans in Healthy versus Gingivitis and Chronic Periodontitis: A Clinico-Microbiological Study10.4103/0976-237X.194114 ↗