Antibacterial effect of a hyperosmotic solution containing sorbate and ethanol on Enterococcus faecalis in planktonic form and as biofilm: an in vitro study. / Efecto antibacteriano de una solución hiperosmótica a base de sorbato y etanol sobre Enterococcus faecalis en forma planctónica y como biofilm: estudio in vitro.
Resumen
Abstract.
The antibacterial effect of a hyperosmotic solution containing sorbate and ethanol on E. faecalis in planktonic state and in biofilm was evaluated. Three hyperosmotic solutions (HS-A, HS-B y HS-C) were obtained from different formulations of potassium sorbate and sodium chloride, which were tested as antimicrobials against planktonic forms of E. faecalis, in McFarland standards from 0.5 to 7, using the sedimentation technique and colony forming units (CFU) count. Afterwards an E. faecalis biofilm was produced in the palatal roots of upper first molars, by a static method in 21 days; subsequently they were prepared biomechanically by the Universal Protaper system, using the hyperosmotic solution B as an irrigant to evaluate the bacterial load reduction. One pre-instrumentation sample and one post-instrumentation sample were taken, and then were processed and cultivated to count CFU. Consecutively, roots were observed by scanning electron microscopy. The hyperosmotic solution had an important antibacterial effect when used against E. faecalis in planktonic state; solutions HS-A and HS-B were effective in eliminating E. faecalis up to 7 McFarland, while a statistical difference (p˂0.001) was observed in reducing the bacterial load in the biofilm, based on the log10 CFU count. The final solution tested seemed not to harm the dentinal structure and was capable of causing morphological changes to the bacterial cell consistent with a hyperosmotic shock. Thus, the solutions tested could be an option to be considered as irrigating agents; nonetheless further research is required regarding its biocompatibility.
Resumen.
Se evaluó el efecto de una solución hiperosmótica sobre E. faecalis en forma planctónica y en forma de biofilm. A partir de formulaciones de sorbato de potasio y cloruro de sodio se obtuvieron tres soluciones hiperosmóticas (HS-A, HS-B y HS-C) con ellas se realizaron pruebas antimicrobianas contra E. faecalis en forma planctónica en concentraciones desde 0,5 hasta 7 McFarland mediante técnica de sedimentación y cuenta de UFC. Posteriormente se formó biofilm de E. faecalis por método estático por 21 días en raíces palatinas de primeros molares superiores, las cuales se prepararon biomecánicamente mediante el sistema Protaper Universal usando la solución hiperosmótica HS-B como irrigante para luego evaluar la disminución de carga bacteriana, comparando el conteo de UFC de muestras pre-instrumentación con muestras postinstrumentación. Consecutivamente las raíces fueron observadas al microscopio electrónico de barrido. En las pruebas contra microorganismos planctónicos las soluciones HS-A y HS-B fueron efectivas en eliminar E. faecalis hasta un Mc Farland de 7. En la reducción de carga bacteriana mediante conteo de UFC de los microorganismos embebidos en biofilm, se identificó una diferencia estadística (p˂0,001). La solución hiperosmótica tiene un importante efecto antibacteriano contra E. faecalis en forma planctónica y en forma de biofilm, no parece dañar la estructura dentinaria y es capaz de provocar cambios morfológicos a la célula bacteriana consistentes con shock hiperosmótico. De manera que la solución hiperosmótica parecería ser una opción a ser considerada como agente irrigante o coadyuvante de la irrigación; sin embargo, se requiere investigar más profundamente con respecto a su biocompatibilidad.
Descargas
Citas
Walsh L, George R. Activation of alkali- ne irrigation fluids in endodontics. Mate- rials 2017; 10(10): 1214. doi: 10.3390/ ma10101214.
Bowen WH, Burne RA, Wu H, Koo H. Oral biofilms: pathogens, matrix, and polymi- crobial interactions in microenvironments. Trends in Microbiology 2018; 26(3): 229–242.
Mira A, Simon-Soro A, Curtis MA. Role of microbial communities in the pathogenesis of periodontal diseases and caries. J Clin Periodontol 2017; 44 (Suppl 18): S23-S38.
Duggan JM, Sedgley CM. Biofilm forma- tion of oral and endodontic Enterococcus faecalis. J Endod 2007; 33:815– 818.
Komiyama EY, Lepesqueur LSS, Yassuda CG, Samaranayake LP, Parahitiyawa NB, Balducci I. Enterococcus species in the oral cavity: prevalence, virulence factors and antimicrobial susceptibility. PLoS ONE 2016; 11(9): e0163001.
Rossi-Fedele G, Guastalli AR. Osmolari- ty and root canal antiseptics. Int Endod J 2014; 47(4):314–320.
Wood JM. Bacterial responses to osmotic challenges. J Gen Physiol 2015; 145: 381–388.
Van der Waal SV, Jiang LM, de Soet JJ, van der Sluis LWM, Wesselink PR, Crielaard W. Sodium chloride and potassium sorbate: a synergistic combination against Entero- coccus faecalis biofilms: an in vitro study. Eur J Oral Sci 2012; 120(5):452–457.
Galdámez Falla VM, González Amaro AM, González Ortega O, Mariel Cárdenas J, Gutiérrez Cantú FJ, Vitales Noyola M. Oliva Rodríguez R. Antimicrobial effect of a hyperosmotic solution on endodontic microorganisms in planktonic state. Invest Clin 2019; 60(1):38-46.
Saleh IM, Ruyter IE, Haapasalo M, Òrsta- vik D. Survival of Enterococcus faecalis in infected dentinal tubules after root canal filling with different root canal sealers in vitro. Int Endod J 2004; (37) 3:193–198.
Hockett JL, Dommisch JK, Johnson JD, Cohenca N. Antimicrobial efficacy of two irrigation techniques in tapered and nonta- pered canal preparations: an in vitro study. J Endod 2008;34(11):1374–1377.
Flemming HC, Wingender J, Szewzyk U, Steinberg P, Rice SA, Kjelleberg S. Bio- films: an emergent form of bacterial life. Nat Rev Microbiol 2016;14(9):563-575.
Patini R, Cattani P, Marchetti S, Isola G, Quaranta G, Gallenzi P. Evaluation of predation capability of periodontopatho- gens bacteria by Bdellovibrio Bacteriovorus HD100. An in vitro study. Materials 2019; 12: 2008. doi: 10.3390/ma12122008.
Eneide C, Castagnola R, Martini C, Gran- de NM, Bugli F, Patini R, Cordaro M, San- guinetti M, Olivi G, Isola G, Marigo L. Antibiofilm activity of three different irri- gation techniques: An in vitro study. Anti- biotics 2019; 8: 112. doi: 10.3390/antibio- tics8030112.
Hartmann RC, Neuvald L, Barth V Jr, de Figuereido JAP, de Oliveira SD, Scarparo RK, Waltrick SB, Rossi-Fedele G. Antimi- crobial efficacy of 0.5% peracetic acid and EDTA with passive ultrasonic or manual agi- tation in an Enterococcus faecalis biofilm model. Aust Endod J 2019;45(1):57-63.
Paranjpe A, De Gregorio C, Gonzalez AM, Gomez A, Silva Herzog D, Piña AA. Effica- cy of the self-adjusting file system on clea- ning and shaping oval canals: A microbiolo- gical and microscopic evaluation. J Endod 2012;38(2):226–231.
Stoodley P, Sauer K, Davies DG, Coster- ton JW. Biofilms as complex differentiated communities. Annu Rev Microbiol 2002: 56:187–209.
Yigit A, Korukluoglu M. The effect of po- tassium sorbate, NaCl and pH on the growth of food spoilage fungi. Ann Microbiol 2007; 57(2):209–215.
Simpson CA, Sofos JN. Antimicrobial In- gredients. In: Tarté R. (eds) Ingredients in Meat Products 2009; Springer, New York, NY.
Suchomel M, Lenhardt A, Kampf G, Gri- sold A. Enterococcus hirae, Enterococcus faecium and Enterococcus faecalis show different sensitivities to typical biocidal agents used for disinfection. J Hospit In- fect 2019; 103(4):435-440. doi: 10.1016/j.jhin.2019.08.014. Epub 2019 Aug 23.
Suman JM, Kuga MC, Abreu Da Rosa R, Santini MF, Grazziotin-Soares R, Mon- tagner F, Só MVR. Antibacterial activity of chlorhexidine after final irrigation with ethanol: CLSM and culture-based method analysis. Microsc Res Tech 2015; 78(8):
-687.
Duarte PH, Barcellos P, Abreu R, Montag- ner F, Húngaro MA, Carlos M, Vinícius M. Effect of ethanol on the antimicrobial pro- perties of chlorhexidine over oral biofilm. Microsc ResTech 2018; 81(4):408-412. doi:10.1002/jemt.22992. Epub 2018 Jan 17.
Burkewitz K, Choe KP, Lee EC, Deonari- ne A, Strange K. Characterization of the proteostasis roles of glycerol accumulation, protein degradation and protein synthesis during osmotic stress in C. elegans. PLoS One 2012; 7(3):1-14.
Gutiérrez C, Abee T, Booth IR. Physiolo- gy of the osmotic stress response in mi- croorganisms. Int J Food Microbiol 1995; 28(2):233-244.
