How can biophotonics help dentistry to avoid or minimize cross infection by SARS-CoV-2?

Biophotonics is defined as the combination of biology and photonics (the physical science of the light). It is a general term for all techniques that deal with the interaction between biological tissues/cells and photons (light). Biophotonics offers a great variety of techniques that can facilitate the early detection of diseases and promote innovative theragnostic approaches. As the COVID-19 infection can be transmitted due to the face-to-face communication, droplets and aerosol inhalation and the exposure to saliva, blood, and other body fluids, as well as the handling of sharp instruments, dental practices are at increased risk of infection. In this paper, a literature review was performed to explore the application of Biophotonics approaches in Dentistry focusing on the COVID-19 pandemic and how they can contribute to avoid or minimize the risks of infection in a dental setting. For this, search-related papers were retrieved from PubMED, Scielo, Google Schoolar, and American Dental Association and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention databases. The body of evidence currently available showed that Biophotonics approaches can reduce microorganism load, decontaminate surfaces, air, tissues, and minimize the generation of aerosol and virus spreading by minimally invasive, time-saving, and alternative techniques in general. However, each clinical situation must be individually evaluated regarding the benefits and drawbacks of these approaches, but always pursuing less-invasive and less aerosol-generating procedures, especially during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Photodynamic therapy for infections: clinical applications.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Photodynamic therapy (PDT) was discovered over 100 years ago by its ability to kill various microorganisms when the appropriate dye and light were combined in the presence of oxygen. However it is only in relatively recent times that PDT has been studied as a treatment for various types of localized infections. This resurgence of interest has been partly motivated by the alarming increase in drug resistance amongst bacteria and other pathogens. This review will focus on the clinical applications of antimicrobial PDT. STUDY DESIGN/MATERIALS AND METHODS: The published peer-reviewed literature was reviewed between 1960 and 2011. RESULTS: The basics of antimicrobial PDT are discussed. Clinical applications of antimicrobial PDT to localized viral infections caused by herpes and papilloma viruses, and nonviral dermatological infections such as acne and other yeast, fungal and bacterial skin infections are covered. PDT has been used to treat bacterial infections in brain abscesses and non-healing ulcers. PDT for dental infections including periodontitis and endodontics has been well studied. PDT has also been used for cutaneous Leishmaniasis. Clinical trials of PDT and blue light alone therapy for gastric Helicobacter pylori infection are also covered. CONCLUSION: As yet clinical PDT for infections has been mainly in the field of dermatology using 5-aminolevulanic acid and in dentistry using phenothiazinium dyes. We expect more to see applications of PDT to more challenging infections using advanced antimicrobial photosensitizers targeted to microbial cells in the years to come.

Photodynamic therapy for methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus infection in a mouse skin abrasion model.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) skin infections are now known to be a common and important problem in the Unites States. The objective of this study was to investigate the efficacy of photodynamic therapy (PDT) for the treatment of MRSA infection in skin abrasion wounds using a mouse model. STUDY DESIGN/MATERIALS AND METHODS: A mouse model of skin abrasion wound infected with MRSA was developed. Bioluminescent strain of MRSA, a derivative of ATCC 33591, was used to allow the real-time monitoring of the extent of infection in mouse wounds. PDT was performed with the combination of a polyethylenimine (PEI)-ce6 photosensitizer (PS) and non-coherent red light. In vivo fluorescence imaging was carried out to evaluate the effect of photobleaching of PS during PDT. RESULTS: In vivo fluorescence imaging of conjugate PEI-ce6 applied in mice indicated the photobleaching effect of the PS during PDT. PDT induced on average 2.7 log(10) of inactivation of MRSA as judged by loss of bioluminescence in mouse skin abrasion wounds and accelerated the wound healing on average by 8.6 days in comparison to the untreated infected wounds. Photobleaching of PS in the wound was overcome by adding the PS solution in aliquots. CONCLUSION: PDT may represent an alternative approach for the treatment of MRSA skin infections.

Photodynamic therapy for Acinetobacter baumannii burn infections in mice.

Multidrug-resistant Acinetobacter baumannii infections represent a growing problem, especially in traumatic wounds and burns suffered by military personnel injured in Middle Eastern conflicts. Effective treatment with traditional antibiotics can be extremely difficult, and new antimicrobial approaches are being investigated. One of these alternatives to antimicrobials could be the combination of nontoxic photosensitizers (PSs) and visible light, known as photodynamic therapy (PDT). We report on the establishment of a new mouse model of full-thickness thermal burns infected with a bioluminescent derivative of a clinical Iraqi isolate of A. baumannii and its PDT treatment by topical application of a PS produced by the covalent conjugation of chlorin(e6) to polyethylenimine, followed by illumination of the burn surface with red light. Application of 10(8) A. baumannii cells to the surface of 10-s burns made on the dorsal surface of shaved female BALB/c mice led to chronic infections that lasted, on average, 22 days and that were characterized by a remarkably stable bacterial bioluminescence. PDT carried out on day 0 soon after application of the bacteria gave over 3 log units of loss of bacterial luminescence in a light exposure-dependent manner, while PDT carried out on day 1 and day 2 gave an approximately 1.7-log reduction. The application of PS dissolved in 10% or 20% dimethyl sulfoxide without light gave only a modest reduction in the bacterial luminescence from mouse burns. Some bacterial regrowth in the treated burn was observed but was generally modest. It was also found that PDT did not lead to the inhibition of wound healing. The data suggest that PDT may be an effective new treatment for multidrug-resistant localized A. baumannii infections.

Recent Patents on Light-Based Anti-Infective Approaches.

BACKGROUND: Antibiotic resistance is one of the most serious health threats to modern medicine. The lack of potent antibiotics puts us at a disadvantage in the fight against infectious diseases, especially those caused by antibiotic-resistant microbial strains. To this end, an urgent need to search for alternative antimicrobial approaches has arisen. In the last decade, light-based anti-infective therapy has made significant strides in this fight to combat antibiotic resistance among various microbial strains. This method includes utilizing antimicrobial blue light, antimicrobial photodynamic therapy, and germicidal ultraviolet irradiation, among others. Light-based therapy is advantageous over traditional antibiotics in that it eradicates microbial cells rapidly and the likelihood of light-resistance development by microbes is low. METHODS: This review highlights the patents on light-based therapy that were filed approximately within the last decade and are dedicated to eradicating pathogenic microorganisms. The primary database that was used for the search was Google Patents. The searches were performed using the keywords including blue light, antimicrobial photodynamic therapy, ultraviolet irradiation, antibiotic resistance, disinfection, bacterium, fungus, and virus. RESULTS: Forty-five patents were obtained in our search: 9 patents for the antimicrobial blue light approach, 21 for antimicrobial photodynamic therapy, 11 for UV irradiation, and lastly 4 for other light-based anti-infective approaches. The treatments and devices discussed in this review are interestingly enough able to be used in various different functions and settings, such as dental applications, certain eye diseases, skin and hard surface cleansing, decontamination of internal organs (e.g., the stomach), decontamination of apparel and equipment, eradication of pathogenic microorganisms from buildings and rooms, etc. Most of the devices and inventions introduce methods of destroying pathogenic bacteria and fungi without harming human cells and tissues. CONCLUSIONS: Light-based antimicrobial approaches hold great promise for the future in regards to treating antibiotic-resistant infections and related diseases.

Light based anti-infectives: ultraviolet C irradiation, photodynamic therapy, blue light, and beyond.

Owing to the worldwide increase in antibiotic resistance, researchers are investigating alternative anti-infective strategies to which it is supposed microorganisms will be unable to develop resistance. Prominent among these strategies, is a group of approaches which rely on light to deliver the killing blow. As is well known, ultraviolet light, particularly UVC (200-280 nm), is germicidal, but it has not been much developed as an anti-infective approach until recently, when it was realized that the possible adverse effects to host tissue were relatively minor compared to its high activity in killing pathogens. Photodynamic therapy is the combination of non-toxic photosensitizing dyes with harmless visible light that together produce abundant destructive reactive oxygen species (ROS). Certain cationic dyes or photosensitizers have good specificity for binding to microbial cells while sparing host mammalian cells and can be used for treating many localized infections, both superficial and even deep-seated by using fiber optic delivered light. Many microbial cells are highly sensitive to killing by blue light (400-470 nm) due to accumulation of naturally occurring photosensitizers such as porphyrins and flavins. Near infrared light has also been shown to have antimicrobial effects against certain species. Clinical applications of these technologies include skin, dental, wound, stomach, nasal, toenail and other infections which are amenable to effective light delivery.

Photodynamic inactivation of biofilm: taking a lightly colored approach to stubborn infection.

Microbial biofilms are responsible for a variety of microbial infections in different parts of the body, such as urinary tract infections, catheter infections, middle-ear infections, gingivitis, caries, periodontitis, orthopedic implants, and so on. The microbial biofilm cells have properties and gene expression patterns distinct from planktonic cells, including phenotypic variations in enzymic activity, cell wall composition and surface structure, which increase the resistance to antibiotics and other antimicrobial treatments. There is consequently an urgent need for new approaches to attack biofilm-associated microorganisms, and antimicrobial photodynamic therapy (aPDT) may be a promising candidate. aPDT involves the combination of a nontoxic dye and low-intensity visible light which, in the presence of oxygen, produces cytotoxic reactive oxygen species. It has been demonstrated that many biofilms are susceptible to aPDT, particularly in dental disease. This review will focus on aspects of aPDT that are designed to increase efficiency against biofilms modalities to enhance penetration of photosensitizer into biofilm, and a combination of aPDT with biofilm-disrupting agents.

Photodynamic therapy for localized infections--state of the art.

Photodynamic therapy (PDT) was discovered over 100 years ago by observing the killing of microorganisms when harmless dyes and visible light were combined in vitro. Since then it has primarily been developed as a treatment for cancer, ophthalmologic disorders and in dermatology. However, in recent years interest in the antimicrobial effects of PDT has revived and it has been proposed as a therapy for a large variety of localized infections. This revival of interest has largely been driven by the inexorable increase in drug resistance among many classes of pathogen. Advantages of PDT include equal killing effectiveness regardless of antibiotic resistance, and a lack of induction of PDT resistance. Disadvantages include the cessation of the antimicrobial effect when the light is turned off, and less than perfect selectivity for microbial cells over host tissue. This review will cover the use of PDT to kill or inactivate pathogens in ex vivo tissues and in biological materials such as blood. PDT has been successfully used to kill pathogens and even to save life in several animal models of localized infections such as surface wounds, burns, oral sites, abscesses and the middle ear. A large number of clinical studies of PDT for viral papillomatosis lesions and for acne refer to its antimicrobial effect, but it is unclear how important this microbial killing is to the overall therapeutic outcome. PDT for periodontitis is a rapidly growing clinical application and other dental applications are under investigation. PDT is being clinically studied for other dermatological infections such as leishmaniasis and mycobacteria. Antimicrobial PDT will become more important in the future as antibiotic resistance is only expected to continue to increase.