International Journal of Experimental Dental Science

Register      Login

VOLUME 4 , ISSUE 2 ( July-December, 2015 ) > List of Articles

RESEARCH ARTICLE

Comparison of Fungal Biofilm Formation on Three Contemporary Denture Base Materials

Russell Wicks, Jegdish Babu, Franklin Garcia-Godoy, Vinay Jain

Citation Information : Wicks R, Babu J, Garcia-Godoy F, Jain V. Comparison of Fungal Biofilm Formation on Three Contemporary Denture Base Materials. Int J Experiment Dent Sci 2015; 4 (2):104-108.

DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10029-1106

Published Online: 01-12-2015

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2015; Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) Ltd.


Abstract

Purpose

The purpose of this study was to investigate the potential of three denture base materials to support fungal biofilm formation.

Materials and methods

Specimens of two ‘flexible’ nylon type materials and one traditional heat processed, methyl methacrylate resin material were studied (both polished and unpolished surfaces). The specimens were coated with saliva and evaluated for fungal (Candida albicans) biofilm formation. The fungal biofilm mass formed on denture substrates were evaluated by dry weight analysis and by determining the number of viable fungal cells in the biofilm by MTT viability assay. Alteration in fungal metabolic function following the treatment of the biofilm C. albicans with nystatin and fluconazole was determined by XTT assay.

Results

In general, the unpolished surfaces of the denture disks favored the fungal biofilm, the most being on polyamide specimen, Valplast. Significantly, less biofilm was formed on Duraflex and Lucitone surfaces. Biofim on C. albicans was also found to be resistant to antifungal agents. As compared to freshly incubated (grown) planktonic cells, biofilm fungal cells required significantly higher concentrations of nystatin and fluconazole in order to obtain 50% reduction in metabolic activity.

Conclusion

This study demonstrated the differences in denture materials to support fungal biofilm formation, and also difference between polished and unpolished denture material surfaces. The results demonstrated that one of the polyamide materials (duraflex) had lesser potential to biofilm formation than the others.

Clinical significance

Unfavorable tissue responses can ensue from the presence of fungal biofilms on dental prosthetics. Resistance to biofilm formation is a factor for dental materials in their selection and usage. This study helps to quantify, evaluate and compare biofilm formation on polished and unpolished surfaces of three commonly used denture base materials. The results of this study helped to identify materials, which may, therefore, be better indicated in clinical applications. Evaluations for the newer denture base materials, specific to these testing methods, appear to be novel in the scientific literature.

How to cite this article

Jain V, Babu J, Ahuja S, Wicks R, Garcia-Godoy F. Comparison of Fungal Biofilm Formation on Three Contemporary Denture Base Materials. Int J Experiment Dent Sci 2015;4(2):104-108.


PDF Share
  1. Denture base materials. Dent Clin North Am 1996;40(1):113-120.
  2. Polyamides in dentistry. Int J Scientific Study 2013;1(1):20-25.
  3. Denture related candidiasis. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol 1976;41(1):59-60.
  4. Denture sore mouth, the role of Candida. Dent Practit 1965;16(4):138-142.
  5. Denture plaque and adherence of Candida albicans to denture-base materials in vivo and in vitro. Crit Rev Oral Biol Med 1999;10(1):99-116.
  6. Reassessing the presence of Candida albicans in denture-related stomatitis. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 2003;95(1):51-59.
  7. Molecular and cellular mechanisms that lead to Candida biofilm formation. J Dent Res 2009;88(2):105-115.
  8. Denture stomatitis and salivary Candida in Brazilian edentulous patients. J Oral Rehabil 2002;29(11):1115-1119.
  9. Efficacy of denture cleansers on Candida spp. biofilm formed on polyamide and polymethyl methacrylate resins. J Prosthet Dent 2011;105(1):51-58.
  10. Oral mucosal health and disease in institutionalized elderly in Brazil. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol 1991;19(3):173-175.
  11. The cultivable microflora of denture plaque from patients with denture-induced stomatitis. Microb Ecol Health Dis 1991;4(3):149-157.
  12. Epidemiology and etiology of denture stomatitis. J Prosthodont 2011;20(4):251-260.
  13. Adhesion of pathogenic Candida species to host surfaces. Microbiol Sci 1985;2(8):243-247.
  14. The influence of surface free energy and surface roughness on early plaque formation: an in vitro study in man. J Clin Periodontol 1990;17(3):138-144.
  15. FEMS Microbiol Rev 1992;8(3-4):199-209.
  16. Candida biofilms and oral candidosis: treatment and prevention. Periodontol 2000;55(1):250-265.
  17. The oral distribution of Candida in denture stomatitis. Br Dent J 1970;129(4):151-156.
  18. Denture stomatitis. Occurrence and distribution of fungi. Acta Odontol Scand 1974;32(5):329-333.
  19. Inhibition of Streptococcus gordonii metabolic activity in biofilm by cranberry juice high molecular weight component. J Biomed Biotechnol 2012;2012:590384.
  20. Bacterial adhesion to inert thermoplastic surfaces. J Mater Sci Mater Med 1996;7(10):597-601.
  21. Candida biofilms on implanted biomaterials: a clinically significant problem. FEMS Yeast Res 2006;6(7):979-986.
  22. Effects of salivary or serum pellicles on the Candida albicans growth and biofilm formation on soft lining materials in vitro. J Oral Rehabil 1997;24(8):594-604.
PDF Share
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.