Laser-induced vapor nanobubbles improve diffusion in biofilms of antimicrobial agents for wound care.

Being responsible for delayed wound healing, the presence of biofilms in infected wounds leads to chronic, and difficult to treat infections. One of the reasons why antimicrobial treatment often fails to cure biofilm infections is the reduced penetration rate of antibiotics through dense biofilms. Strategies that have the ability to somehow interfere with the integrity of biofilms and allowing a better penetration of drugs are highly sought after. A promising new approach is the use of laser-induced vapor nanobubbles (VNB), of which it was recently demonstrated that it can substantially enhance the penetration of antibiotics into biofilms, resulting in a marked improvement of the killing efficiency. In this study, we examined if treatment of biofilms with laser-induced vapor nanobubbles (VNB) can enhance the potency of antimicrobials which are commonly used to treat wound infections, including povidone-iodine, chlorhexidine, benzalkonium chloride, cetrimonium bromide and mupirocin. Our investigations were performed on Pseudomonas aeruginosa and Staphylococcus aureus biofilms, which are often implicated in chronic wound infections. Pre-treatment of biofilms with laser-induced VNB did enhance the killing efficiency of those antimicrobials which experience a diffusion barrier in the biofilms, while this was not the case for those compounds for which there is no diffusion barrier. The magnitude of the enhanced potency was in most cases similar to the enhancement that was obtained when the biofilms were completely disrupted by vortexing and sonication. These results show that laser-induced VNB are indeed a very efficient way to enhance drug penetration deep into biofilms, and pave the way towards clinical translation of this novel approach for treatment of wound infections.

Efficacy of sonically, ultrasonically and laser-activated irrigation in removing a biofilm-mimicking hydrogel from an isthmus model.

AIM: To evaluate the efficacy of sonically, ultrasonically and laser-activated irrigation (LAI) in removing a biofilm-mimicking hydrogel from the isthmus in a root canal model. METHODOLOGY: Transparent resin blocks containing two standardized root canals (apical diameter of 0.3 mm, 6% taper, 16 mm long, with a coronal reservoir) connected by an isthmus (0.15 mm wide, 2 mm high) were used as the test model. The isthmus was filled with a hydrogel-containing dentine debris. The canals were filled with irrigant, and the models were randomly assigned to the following activation groups (n = 20): EndoActivator (EA), Eddy, ultrasonically activated irrigation (UAI) with an Irrisafe 25 mm length, size 25 file and LAI with a 2940 nm Er:YAG-laser (20 Hz, 50 µs, 20 mJ, PIPS tip at the canal entrance). All protocols were executed for 3 × 20 s. Needle irrigation (NI) with a 27G needle served as the control. Standardized images of the isthmus were taken before and after irrigation, and the amount of removed hydrogel was determined using image analysis software and compared across groups using Welch anova (P ≤ 0.05). RESULTS: Hydrogel removal was greatest in the LAI group (90.2%) and was significantly greater than that with UAI, EA and NI (P ≤ 0.014), but not significantly different from Eddy (P = 0.498). Hydrogel removal with Eddy (85.9%) was significantly greater than that with NI and EA (P < 0.05), but not significantly different from UAI (P = 0.07). There was no significant difference between the NI and EA groups (P = 1). CONCLUSIONS: Laser-activated irrigation and Eddy resulted in the greatest hydrogel removal and performed better than EA and UAI. The effect of LAI was also not dependent on deep intracanal tip placement.

Biofilm model systems for root canal disinfection: a literature review.

The aim of this review was to present an overview of laboratory root canal biofilm model systems described in the endodontic literature and to critically appraise the various factors that constitute these models. The electronic databases MEDLINE, Web of Science and EMBASE were searched up to and including December 2016 to identify laboratory studies using endodontic biofilm models. The following search terms were used in various combinations: biofilm, root canal, in vitro, endodontic, bacteria, root canal infection model, colony-forming unit. Only English papers from journals with an impact factor were selected. The records were screened by two reviewers, and full-text articles were assessed according to pre-defined criteria. The following data were extracted from the included studies: the microbial composition of the biofilm, the substrate, growth conditions, validation and quantification. Seventy-seven articles met the inclusion criteria. In the majority (86%) of the studies, a monospecies biofilm was cultured. In two studies, a dual-species biofilm was grown; others cultivated a multispecies biofilm, containing at least three species. Enterococcus faecalis was the most frequently used test species (in 79% of all studies, 92% of the monospecies studies). Four studies used an inoculum derived directly from the oral cavity. Human dentine was the most frequently used substratum (88% of the studies). Incubation times differed considerably, ranging from one to seventy days. The most common quantification method (in 87% of the studies) was bacterial culturing, followed by microscopy techniques. The variation in laboratory root canal biofilm model systems is notable. Because of substantial variation in experimental parameters, it is difficult to compare results between studies. This demonstrates the need for a more standardized approach and a validated endodontic biofilm model.