ArticleClinical oral investigations2023
Optimizing the use of low-frequency ultrasound for bacterial detachment of in vivo biofilms in dental research-a methodological study.
Article in Clinical oral investigations, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Laboratory investigation of intra-tooth variability in microbial communities from clinically isolated root canal and filling material.Clinical oral investigations · 2026Article
- Influence of heat-non-burn tobacco aerosol on the microbiome of biofilm from human whole saliva bacteria in vitro.Clinical oral investigations · 2026Article
- Tackling Drug Resistance and Virulence inThe Canadian journal of infectious diseases & medical microbiology = Journal canadien des maladies infectieuses et de la microbiologie medicale · 2026Article
- Ultrasonic strategies for mitigating microbial adhesion and biofilm formation on medical surfaces: a mini review.Frontiers in microbiology · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesLow-frequency, low-intensity ultrasound is commonly utilized in various dental research fields to remove biofilms from surfaces, but no clear recommendation exists in dental studies so far. Therefore, this study aims to optimize the sonication procedure for the dental field to efficiently detach bacteria while preserving viability. MATERIALS AND
methodsInitial biofilm was formed in vivo on bovine enamel slabs (n = 6) which were worn by four healthy participants for 4 h and 24 h. The enamel slabs covered with biofilm were then ultrasonicated ex vivo for various time periods (0, 1, 2, 4, 6 min). Colony-forming units were determined for quantification, and bacteria were identified using MALDI-TOF. Scanning electron microscopic images were taken to also examine the efficiency of ultrasonications for different time periods.
resultsUltrasonication for 1 min resulted in the highest bacterial counts, with at least 4.5-fold number compared to the non-sonicated control (p < 0.05). Most bacteria were detached within the first 2 min of sonication, but there were still bacteria detached afterwards, although significantly fewer (p < 0.0001). The highest bacterial diversity was observed after 1 and 2 min of sonication (p < 0.03). Longer sonication periods negatively affected bacterial counts of anaerobes, Gram-negative bacteria, and bacilli. Scanning electron microscopic images demonstrated the ability of ultrasound to desorb microorganisms, as well as revealing cell damage and remaining bacteria.
conclusionsWith the use of low-frequency, low-intensity ultrasound, significantly higher bacterial counts and diversity can be reached. A shorter sonication time of 1 min shows the best results overall. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: This standardization is recommended to study initial oral biofilms aged up to 24 h to maximize the outcome of experiments and lead to better comparability of studies.
Indexed as
Identifiers
38141103What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.