Effect of food preservatives on in situ biofilm formation
The aim of this double-blind, controlled crossover study was to evaluate the influence of food preservatives on in situ dental biofilm growth. Twenty-four volunteers wore appliances with six specimens each of bovine enamel to build up intra-oral biofilms. During three test cycles, the subjects had t...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | Clinical oral investigations 2008-09, Vol.12 (3), p.203-208 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 208 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 3 |
| container_start_page | 203 |
| container_title | Clinical oral investigations |
| container_volume | 12 |
| creator | Arweiler, Nicole Birgit Lenz, Ronaldo Sculean, Anton Al-Ahmad, Ali Hellwig, Elmar Auschill, Thorsten Mathias |
| description | The aim of this double-blind, controlled crossover study was to evaluate the influence of food preservatives on in situ dental biofilm growth. Twenty-four volunteers wore appliances with six specimens each of bovine enamel to build up intra-oral biofilms. During three test cycles, the subjects had to put one half of the appliance twice a day in one of the assigned active solutions (0.1% benzoate, BA; 0.1% sorbate, SA or 0.2% chlorhexidine, CHX) and the other into NaCl. After 5 days, the developed biofilms were stained with two fluorescent dyes to visualise vital (green) and dead bacteria (red). Biofilms were scanned by confocal laser scanning microscopy and biofilm thickness (BT) and bacterial vitality (BV%) were calculated. After a washout period of 7 days, a new test cycle was started. The use of SA, BA and CHX resulted in a significantly reduced BT and BV compared to NaCl (
p
0.05) for both parameters, while CHX showed significantly lower values. Both preservatives showed antibacterial and plaque-inhibiting properties, but not to the extent of CHX. The biofilm model enabled the examination of undisturbed oral biofilm formation influenced by antibacterial components under clinical conditions. |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1007/s00784-008-0188-6 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_69355456</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>69355456</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c466t-cd6e18642c8fa2a7fba648586ea59292f74ab54df27b43b55cf6c55b164ebc633</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFkE1LxDAQhoMo7rr6A7xI8eCtms9JehRZP2DBi55DmibSZdusSbvgv7e1CwuCeEkC8-SdmQehS4JvCcbyLg2H4jnGKsdEqRyO0JxwBjmTkhz_vGkOhSIzdJbSGmPCQbJTNCOKCcmlmKNi6b2zXRZ85kOosm10ycWd6eqdS1los7rNUt31WVkHX2-agYrNUA3tOTrxZpPcxf5eoPfH5dvDc756fXp5uF_llgN0ua3AEQWcWuUNNdKXBrgSCpwRBS2ol9yUgleeypKzUgjrwQpREuCutMDYAt1MudsYPnuXOt3UybrNxrQu9ElDwYTgAv4FSQEcqBwTr3-B69DHdlhCU1oAJYyQASITZGNIKTqvt7FuTPzSBOvRvp7s68G-Hu3rcYKrfXBfNq46_NjrHgA6AWkotR8uHjr_nfoN7-eOUw</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>229621311</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Effect of food preservatives on in situ biofilm formation</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>SpringerLink Journals - AutoHoldings</source><creator>Arweiler, Nicole Birgit ; Lenz, Ronaldo ; Sculean, Anton ; Al-Ahmad, Ali ; Hellwig, Elmar ; Auschill, Thorsten Mathias</creator><creatorcontrib>Arweiler, Nicole Birgit ; Lenz, Ronaldo ; Sculean, Anton ; Al-Ahmad, Ali ; Hellwig, Elmar ; Auschill, Thorsten Mathias</creatorcontrib><description>The aim of this double-blind, controlled crossover study was to evaluate the influence of food preservatives on in situ dental biofilm growth. Twenty-four volunteers wore appliances with six specimens each of bovine enamel to build up intra-oral biofilms. During three test cycles, the subjects had to put one half of the appliance twice a day in one of the assigned active solutions (0.1% benzoate, BA; 0.1% sorbate, SA or 0.2% chlorhexidine, CHX) and the other into NaCl. After 5 days, the developed biofilms were stained with two fluorescent dyes to visualise vital (green) and dead bacteria (red). Biofilms were scanned by confocal laser scanning microscopy and biofilm thickness (BT) and bacterial vitality (BV%) were calculated. After a washout period of 7 days, a new test cycle was started. The use of SA, BA and CHX resulted in a significantly reduced BT and BV compared to NaCl (
p
< 0.001). Differences between SA and BA were not significant (
p
> 0.05) for both parameters, while CHX showed significantly lower values. Both preservatives showed antibacterial and plaque-inhibiting properties, but not to the extent of CHX. The biofilm model enabled the examination of undisturbed oral biofilm formation influenced by antibacterial components under clinical conditions.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1432-6981</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1436-3771</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1007/s00784-008-0188-6</identifier><identifier>PMID: 18357475</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Berlin/Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag</publisher><subject>Adult ; Analysis of Variance ; Biofilms - drug effects ; Chlorhexidine - pharmacology ; Colony Count, Microbial ; Cross-Over Studies ; Dental Plaque - microbiology ; Dentistry ; Double-Blind Method ; Female ; Food Preservatives - pharmacology ; Humans ; Male ; Medicine ; Microbial Viability - drug effects ; Microscopy, Confocal ; Original Article ; Sodium Benzoate - pharmacology ; Sorbic Acid - pharmacology ; Young Adult</subject><ispartof>Clinical oral investigations, 2008-09, Vol.12 (3), p.203-208</ispartof><rights>Springer-Verlag 2008</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c466t-cd6e18642c8fa2a7fba648586ea59292f74ab54df27b43b55cf6c55b164ebc633</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c466t-cd6e18642c8fa2a7fba648586ea59292f74ab54df27b43b55cf6c55b164ebc633</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s00784-008-0188-6$$EPDF$$P50$$Gspringer$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/10.1007/s00784-008-0188-6$$EHTML$$P50$$Gspringer$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,778,782,27911,27912,41475,42544,51306</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18357475$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Arweiler, Nicole Birgit</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lenz, Ronaldo</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sculean, Anton</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Al-Ahmad, Ali</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hellwig, Elmar</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Auschill, Thorsten Mathias</creatorcontrib><title>Effect of food preservatives on in situ biofilm formation</title><title>Clinical oral investigations</title><addtitle>Clin Oral Invest</addtitle><addtitle>Clin Oral Investig</addtitle><description>The aim of this double-blind, controlled crossover study was to evaluate the influence of food preservatives on in situ dental biofilm growth. Twenty-four volunteers wore appliances with six specimens each of bovine enamel to build up intra-oral biofilms. During three test cycles, the subjects had to put one half of the appliance twice a day in one of the assigned active solutions (0.1% benzoate, BA; 0.1% sorbate, SA or 0.2% chlorhexidine, CHX) and the other into NaCl. After 5 days, the developed biofilms were stained with two fluorescent dyes to visualise vital (green) and dead bacteria (red). Biofilms were scanned by confocal laser scanning microscopy and biofilm thickness (BT) and bacterial vitality (BV%) were calculated. After a washout period of 7 days, a new test cycle was started. The use of SA, BA and CHX resulted in a significantly reduced BT and BV compared to NaCl (
p
< 0.001). Differences between SA and BA were not significant (
p
> 0.05) for both parameters, while CHX showed significantly lower values. Both preservatives showed antibacterial and plaque-inhibiting properties, but not to the extent of CHX. The biofilm model enabled the examination of undisturbed oral biofilm formation influenced by antibacterial components under clinical conditions.</description><subject>Adult</subject><subject>Analysis of Variance</subject><subject>Biofilms - drug effects</subject><subject>Chlorhexidine - pharmacology</subject><subject>Colony Count, Microbial</subject><subject>Cross-Over Studies</subject><subject>Dental Plaque - microbiology</subject><subject>Dentistry</subject><subject>Double-Blind Method</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Food Preservatives - pharmacology</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Medicine</subject><subject>Microbial Viability - drug effects</subject><subject>Microscopy, Confocal</subject><subject>Original Article</subject><subject>Sodium Benzoate - pharmacology</subject><subject>Sorbic Acid - pharmacology</subject><subject>Young Adult</subject><issn>1432-6981</issn><issn>1436-3771</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2008</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><sourceid>GNUQQ</sourceid><recordid>eNqFkE1LxDAQhoMo7rr6A7xI8eCtms9JehRZP2DBi55DmibSZdusSbvgv7e1CwuCeEkC8-SdmQehS4JvCcbyLg2H4jnGKsdEqRyO0JxwBjmTkhz_vGkOhSIzdJbSGmPCQbJTNCOKCcmlmKNi6b2zXRZ85kOosm10ycWd6eqdS1los7rNUt31WVkHX2-agYrNUA3tOTrxZpPcxf5eoPfH5dvDc756fXp5uF_llgN0ua3AEQWcWuUNNdKXBrgSCpwRBS2ol9yUgleeypKzUgjrwQpREuCutMDYAt1MudsYPnuXOt3UybrNxrQu9ElDwYTgAv4FSQEcqBwTr3-B69DHdlhCU1oAJYyQASITZGNIKTqvt7FuTPzSBOvRvp7s68G-Hu3rcYKrfXBfNq46_NjrHgA6AWkotR8uHjr_nfoN7-eOUw</recordid><startdate>20080901</startdate><enddate>20080901</enddate><creator>Arweiler, Nicole Birgit</creator><creator>Lenz, Ronaldo</creator><creator>Sculean, Anton</creator><creator>Al-Ahmad, Ali</creator><creator>Hellwig, Elmar</creator><creator>Auschill, Thorsten Mathias</creator><general>Springer-Verlag</general><general>Springer Nature B.V</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>8AO</scope><scope>8C1</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FH</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BBNVY</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>LK8</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>M7P</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>7QL</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20080901</creationdate><title>Effect of food preservatives on in situ biofilm formation</title><author>Arweiler, Nicole Birgit ; Lenz, Ronaldo ; Sculean, Anton ; Al-Ahmad, Ali ; Hellwig, Elmar ; Auschill, Thorsten Mathias</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c466t-cd6e18642c8fa2a7fba648586ea59292f74ab54df27b43b55cf6c55b164ebc633</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2008</creationdate><topic>Adult</topic><topic>Analysis of Variance</topic><topic>Biofilms - drug effects</topic><topic>Chlorhexidine - pharmacology</topic><topic>Colony Count, Microbial</topic><topic>Cross-Over Studies</topic><topic>Dental Plaque - microbiology</topic><topic>Dentistry</topic><topic>Double-Blind Method</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Food Preservatives - pharmacology</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Medicine</topic><topic>Microbial Viability - drug effects</topic><topic>Microscopy, Confocal</topic><topic>Original Article</topic><topic>Sodium Benzoate - pharmacology</topic><topic>Sorbic Acid - pharmacology</topic><topic>Young Adult</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Arweiler, Nicole Birgit</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lenz, Ronaldo</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sculean, Anton</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Al-Ahmad, Ali</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hellwig, Elmar</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Auschill, Thorsten Mathias</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Pharma Collection</collection><collection>Public Health Database</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Natural Science Collection (ProQuest)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>Biological Science Database</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>Bacteriology Abstracts (Microbiology B)</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Clinical oral investigations</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Arweiler, Nicole Birgit</au><au>Lenz, Ronaldo</au><au>Sculean, Anton</au><au>Al-Ahmad, Ali</au><au>Hellwig, Elmar</au><au>Auschill, Thorsten Mathias</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Effect of food preservatives on in situ biofilm formation</atitle><jtitle>Clinical oral investigations</jtitle><stitle>Clin Oral Invest</stitle><addtitle>Clin Oral Investig</addtitle><date>2008-09-01</date><risdate>2008</risdate><volume>12</volume><issue>3</issue><spage>203</spage><epage>208</epage><pages>203-208</pages><issn>1432-6981</issn><eissn>1436-3771</eissn><abstract>The aim of this double-blind, controlled crossover study was to evaluate the influence of food preservatives on in situ dental biofilm growth. Twenty-four volunteers wore appliances with six specimens each of bovine enamel to build up intra-oral biofilms. During three test cycles, the subjects had to put one half of the appliance twice a day in one of the assigned active solutions (0.1% benzoate, BA; 0.1% sorbate, SA or 0.2% chlorhexidine, CHX) and the other into NaCl. After 5 days, the developed biofilms were stained with two fluorescent dyes to visualise vital (green) and dead bacteria (red). Biofilms were scanned by confocal laser scanning microscopy and biofilm thickness (BT) and bacterial vitality (BV%) were calculated. After a washout period of 7 days, a new test cycle was started. The use of SA, BA and CHX resulted in a significantly reduced BT and BV compared to NaCl (
p
< 0.001). Differences between SA and BA were not significant (
p
> 0.05) for both parameters, while CHX showed significantly lower values. Both preservatives showed antibacterial and plaque-inhibiting properties, but not to the extent of CHX. The biofilm model enabled the examination of undisturbed oral biofilm formation influenced by antibacterial components under clinical conditions.</abstract><cop>Berlin/Heidelberg</cop><pub>Springer-Verlag</pub><pmid>18357475</pmid><doi>10.1007/s00784-008-0188-6</doi><tpages>6</tpages></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 1432-6981 |
| ispartof | Clinical oral investigations, 2008-09, Vol.12 (3), p.203-208 |
| issn | 1432-6981 1436-3771 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_69355456 |
| source | MEDLINE; SpringerLink Journals - AutoHoldings |
| subjects | Adult Analysis of Variance Biofilms - drug effects Chlorhexidine - pharmacology Colony Count, Microbial Cross-Over Studies Dental Plaque - microbiology Dentistry Double-Blind Method Female Food Preservatives - pharmacology Humans Male Medicine Microbial Viability - drug effects Microscopy, Confocal Original Article Sodium Benzoate - pharmacology Sorbic Acid - pharmacology Young Adult |
| title | Effect of food preservatives on in situ biofilm formation |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-15T13%3A30%3A55IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Effect%20of%20food%20preservatives%20on%20in%20situ%20biofilm%20formation&rft.jtitle=Clinical%20oral%20investigations&rft.au=Arweiler,%20Nicole%20Birgit&rft.date=2008-09-01&rft.volume=12&rft.issue=3&rft.spage=203&rft.epage=208&rft.pages=203-208&rft.issn=1432-6981&rft.eissn=1436-3771&rft_id=info:doi/10.1007/s00784-008-0188-6&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E69355456%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=229621311&rft_id=info:pmid/18357475&rfr_iscdi=true |