Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27375612›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in microbiology2016

Viable Compositional Analysis of an Eleven Species Oral Polymicrobial Biofilm.

Leighann Sherry, Gillian Lappin, Lindsay E O'Donnell, Emma Millhouse, Owain R Millington, David J Bradshaw, Alyson S Axe, Craig Williams, Christopher J Nile, Gordon Ramage

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in microbiology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
27citing papers in PubMed
5.7field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

27 citing papers in PubMed, 47 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Biofilm · 2023
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Microorganisms · 2020
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Leighann SherryInfection and Immunity Research Group, Glasgow Dental School, School of Medicine, College of Medical, Veterinary and Life Sciences, University of GlasgowGlasgow, UK; Institute of Healthcare Policy and Practice, School of Health, Nursing and Midwifery, University of the West of ScotlandPaisley, UK.
Gillian LappinInfection and Immunity Research Group, Glasgow Dental School, School of Medicine, College of Medical, Veterinary and Life Sciences, University of Glasgow Glasgow, UK.
Lindsay E O'DonnellInfection and Immunity Research Group, Glasgow Dental School, School of Medicine, College of Medical, Veterinary and Life Sciences, University of Glasgow Glasgow, UK.
Emma MillhouseInfection and Immunity Research Group, Glasgow Dental School, School of Medicine, College of Medical, Veterinary and Life Sciences, University of Glasgow Glasgow, UK.
Owain R MillingtonStrathclyde Institute of Pharmacy and Biomedical Sciences, University of Strathclyde Glasgow, UK.
David J BradshawGum Health and Dry Mouth Group, GlaxoSmithKline Consumer Healthcare Weybridge, UK.
Alyson S AxeGum Health and Dry Mouth Group, GlaxoSmithKline Consumer Healthcare Weybridge, UK.
Craig WilliamsInstitute of Healthcare Policy and Practice, School of Health, Nursing and Midwifery, University of the West of Scotland Paisley, UK.
Christopher J NileInfection and Immunity Research Group, Glasgow Dental School, School of Medicine, College of Medical, Veterinary and Life Sciences, University of Glasgow Glasgow, UK.
Gordon RamageInfection and Immunity Research Group, Glasgow Dental School, School of Medicine, College of Medical, Veterinary and Life Sciences, University of Glasgow Glasgow, UK.
University of Glasgow · GBGlaxoSmithKline (United Kingdom) · GBUniversity of Strathclyde · GBUniversity of the West of Scotland · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposePolymicrobial biofilms are abundant in clinical disease, particularly within the oral cavity. Creating complex biofilm models that recapitulate the polymicrobiality of oral disease are important in the development of new chemotherapeutic agents. In order to do this accurately we require the ability to undertake compositional analysis, in addition to determine individual cell viability, which is difficult using conventional microbiology. The aim of this study was to develop a defined multispecies denture biofilm model in vitro, and to assess viable compositional analysis following defined oral hygiene regimens.

methodsAn in vitro multispecies denture biofilm containing various oral commensal and pathogenic bacteria and yeast was created on poly (methyl methacrylate) (PMMA). Denture hygiene regimens tested against the biofilm model included brushing only, denture cleansing only and combinational brushing and denture cleansing. Biofilm composition and viability were assessed by culture (CFU) and molecular (qPCR) methodologies. Scanning electron microscopy and confocal laser scanning microscopy were also employed to visualize changes in denture biofilms following treatment.

resultsCombinational treatment of brushing and denture cleansing had the greatest impact on multispecies denture biofilms, reducing the number of live cells by more than 2 logs, and altering the overall composition in favor of streptococci. This was even more evident during the sequential testing, whereby daily sequential treatment reduced the total and live number of bacteria and yeast more than those treated intermittently. Bacteria and yeast remaining following treatment tended to aggregate in the pores of the PMMA, proving more difficult to fully eradicate the biofilm.

conclusionsOverall, we are the first to develop a method to enable viable compositional analysis of an 11 species denture biofilm following chemotherapeutic challenge. We were able to demonstrate viable cell reduction and changes in population dynamics following evaluation of various denture cleansing regimens. Specifically, it was demonstrated that daily combinational treatment of brushing and cleansing proved to be the most advantageous denture hygiene regimen, however, residual organisms still remained within the pores of PMMA surface, which could act as a reservoir for further biofilm regrowth. We have identified an industry need for denture cleansing agents with the capacity to penetrate these pores and disaggregate these complex biofilm consortia.

Indexed as

biofilmdentureoralpolymicrobialviability

Identifiers

PMID27375612
PMCPMC4902011
OpenAlexW2418248809

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.