Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30304005›Full record

ArticlePloS one2018

Influence of the use of complete denture adhesives on microbial adhesion and biofilm formation by single- and mixed-species.

Norberto Martins de Oliveira Junior, Danny Omar Mendoza Marin, Andressa Rosa Perin Leite, Ana Carolina Pero, Marlise Inêz Klein, Marco Antonio Compagnoni

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Evaluation ofCurrent medical mycology · 2022
    Article
  6. Journal of fungi (Basel, Switzerland) · 2019
    Review
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

6 authors.

Norberto Martins de Oliveira JuniorDepartment of Dental Materials and Prosthodontics, Araraquara Dental School, Sao Paulo State University (UNESP), Araraquara, Sao Paulo, Brazil.
Danny Omar Mendoza MarinDepartment of Dental Materials and Prosthodontics, Araraquara Dental School, Sao Paulo State University (UNESP), Araraquara, Sao Paulo, Brazil.
Andressa Rosa Perin LeiteDepartment of Dental Materials and Prosthodontics, Araraquara Dental School, Sao Paulo State University (UNESP), Araraquara, Sao Paulo, Brazil.
Ana Carolina PeroDepartment of Dental Materials and Prosthodontics, Araraquara Dental School, Sao Paulo State University (UNESP), Araraquara, Sao Paulo, Brazil.
Marlise Inêz KleinDepartment of Dental Materials and Prosthodontics, Araraquara Dental School, Sao Paulo State University (UNESP), Araraquara, Sao Paulo, Brazil.
Marco Antonio CompagnoniDepartment of Dental Materials and Prosthodontics, Araraquara Dental School, Sao Paulo State University (UNESP), Araraquara, Sao Paulo, Brazil.ORCID 0000-0001-8439-0816

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo verify whether the Ultra Corega Cream and Corega Strip Denture Adhesive adhesives interfere in the microbial adhesion and biofilm formation by Candida albicans and Lactobacillus casei in single- and mixed-species settings, and observe whether synergistic or antagonistic relationships between these species occur.

methodsSpecimens made from heat-polymerized acrylic resin (Lucitone 550) were fabricated (n = 144) with a circular shape and standardized roughness (3.0 μm ±0.3 Ra) and were divided into three groups: Without Adhesive (WA), with Ultra Corega Cream adhesive (CA) and Corega Strips adhesive (SA). These groups were divided into three subgroups each: C. albicans single-species, L. casei single-species and C. albicans with L. casei (mixed-species). Microbial adhesion and biofilm formation assays were performed in duplicate at four distinct experimental times (n = 8 per experimental condition). The amount of each microorganism on the surfaces of the specimens was observed by counting of the Colony Forming Units (CFU) per substrate. Additional specimens were characterized by Scanning Electron Microscopy (SEM), with 18 specimens being used in this analysis (n = 18), 2 per experimental condition (n = 2). Two-way ANOVA and Tukey's test for multiple comparisons were employed, using α≤0.05.

resultsL. casei (mixed-species) adhered more on the WA substrate than the CA, while C. albicans (single- and mixed-species) adhered more on the SA. C. albicans, both single- and mixed-species adhered more than the L. casei (single- and mixed-species), regardless of the substrate. L. casei (single-species) formed more biofilm on the WA, but in its mixed cultivation, it had no difference of growth among the tested situations. C. albicans (single- and mixed-species) formed more biofilm on the SA than the CA, and the fungus formed more biofilm when compared to L. casei. In general, whenever a species was compared in its single- and mixed-species situation, no statistically significant difference was observed. SEM of biofilm formation assays demonstrated that L. casei single-species WA formed more biofilm than when the adhesives tested were used, and C. albicans (both single- and mixed-species) formed more biofilm on the SA than on the CA.

conclusions(1) The two denture adhesives tested increased the adhesion of C. albicans but not of L. casei; (2) biofilm formation by C. albicans (single- and mixed-species) was increased on the SA; (3) Relations of synergism or antagonism was not observed between the two microorganisms studied.

Indexed as

Bacterial AdhesionBiofilmsCandida albicansColony Count, MicrobialDental CementsDenture, CompleteDenture RetentionLacticaseibacillus caseiMicroscopy, Electron, ScanningSpecies SpecificitySurface PropertiesCorega denture adhesiveDental Cements

Identifiers

PMID30304005
PMCPMC6179197

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.