Evaluation of biofilm formation on novel copper-catalyzed azide-alkyne cycloaddition (CuAAC)-based resins for dental restoratives
Introduction
The oral cavity is a complex environment where over 700 bacterial species have been detected in the oral common microbiota [1], [2], [3], [4]. Within this diverse community of bacteria found in the mouth, Streptococcus mutans, due to its acidogenic nature and its ability to form biofilms on tooth surfaces, is one of the primary species associated with human dental caries and secondary caries formation [5], [6]. Recent studies have also indicated that numerous other oral bacteria, most notably those that are acid producing, work together to form polymicrobial biofilms that ultimately initiate and further develop tooth decay [7], [8], [9], [10]. In fact, Lactobacillus acidophilus, another commonly found oral acid-producing bacterium, has been found in high numbers in both superficial and deep dental caries [11], [12], and its ability to form biofilms on tooth surfaces is enhanced by the presence of S. mutans, augmenting the ability to cause carious lesions [13], [14].
More than 100 million dental restorations are performed each year and over 50% of these restorations utilize resin-based composites over amalgams [15], [16], [17]. Resin-based composites have many benefits over amalgams, including improved aesthetics, adhesive strength, and filling capability [16], [17], [18]. However, resin-based restoratives frequently have limited longevity due to restoration failure, commonly caused by degradation or fracture of the restoration directly or by failure due to secondary caries formation at the margins around the restoration [17], [19], [20], [21]. Nearly all resin-based composite restoratives are methacrylate-based and consist of a co-monomer mixture comprised from components such as 2,2-bis[4-(2-hydroxy-3-methacryloxypropoxy)phenyl] propane (BisGMA) and triethylene glycol dimethacrylate (TEGDMA) [18], [22] or related monomers. The functional integrity of these methacrylate restoratives relies on the polymerization of resin monomers, and their limited conversion leads not only deterioration of the restorative, but also to release of these monomers into the surrounding tissues [17], [18], [23], [24]. Additionally, numerous studies have demonstrated sensitivity of these restorations in general, and these methacrylate monomers specifically, to hydrolysis by salivary and bacterial esterases found in the oral cavity, resulting in biodegradation by-products (BBPs) [25], [26], [27], [28], [29], [30], [31]. The biodegradation of these restorations increases bacterial leakage between resin-dentin interfaces, leading to further damage to the tooth [32]. Additionally, residual monomers released from resin restorations and resulting BBPs, such as methacrylic acid (MA), bishydroxypropoxyphenyl-propane (Bis-HPPP), and triethylene glycol (TEG), have been thoroughly investigated and implicated in adverse manifestations in the host. In particular, these effects include disruption of immune function [33], [34], [35], [36], [37], cytotoxicity [38], [39], [40], [41], microbiota shifts [42], and accelerated formation of biofilms [43], [44], [45], [46].
Due to the various pitfalls associated with the currently used methacrylate-based composites, the development of new, longer-lasting polymers for dental restoration is of utmost importance and could have a significant positive impact on global oral health. Since bacterial accumulation and biofilms have been implicated in the deterioration of the current BisGMA-TEGDMA based composites, novel resins that have structural stability and also limit bacterial prevalence are desirable to prolong the longevity of dental resins. Recently, novel resins have been developed that specifically have antibacterial properties to resist biofilm formation and incorporate antimicrobial monomers such as novel quaternary ammonium methacrylates [47], [48], [49], methacryloxylethylcetyl dimethyl ammonium chloride [50], and 12-methacryloyloxydodecylpyridinium bromide (MDPB) [51], [52], [53], [54]. Additional strategies have also included the inclusion of alternative antimicrobial agents such as fluoride [49], [55], [56], silver nanoparticles [57], [58], [59], [60], and chlorhexidine [61], [62], [63], to name a few. While providing additional benefits over the currently used resin-based composite systems, many of the approaches listed above continue to rely on the existing methacrylate system and, as such, have been plagued with similar challenges.
Recently, the development and analysis of novel visible light-initiated copper-catalyzed azide-alkyne cycloaddition (CuAAC)-based resins that possess superior mechanical properties, significantly reduced shrinkage stress and suitable polymerization kinetics as compared to BisGMA-based polymers [64], [65], [66], [67], [68], [69], [70]. However, the ability of these resins to promote or restrict bacterial growth has not been evaluated. Therefore, the aim of this study was to evaluate in vitro biofilm formation on the surface of novel copper(I)-catalyzed azide-alkyne cycloaddition (CuAAC)-based resins.
Section snippets
Materials/methods
1,3-Bis(isocyanatomethyl)cyclohexane, 1,3-bis(2-isocyanatopropan-2-yl)benzene, 4,4-methylenebis(cyclohexyl isocyanate), 4,4′-methylenebis(phenyl isocyanate), dibutyltin dilaurate, tetrahydrofuran, 6-chloro-1-hexanol, sodium azide, 1,1,1-tris(hydroxymethyl)propane, propargyl bromide, propargyl alcohol, 3-(triethoxysilyl)propyl isocyanate, copper(II) chloride, N,N,N′,N′,N″-pentamethyldiethylenetriamine (PMDETA), camphorquinone (CQ), toluene, and acetonitrile were used as received from Sigma
BisGMA-TEGDMA and CuAAC resin formulation
A BisGMA:TEGDMA (70:30 weight ratio) mixture with 2 weight percentage of CQ was prepared by physical mixing. Stoichiometric mixtures of a diazide, trialkyne (a mole ratio of 1:1 to N3:alkyne), with different mole percentage of CuCl2[PMDETA] per functionality and 2 mol% of CQ were prepared, and methanol was added to homogenize the mixture and later removed in vacuo.
BisGMA-TEGDMA and CuAAC composite formulation
A BisGMA-TEGDMA (70:30 weight ratio) mixture with 2-weight percentage of CQ was prepared by physical mixing. 60-weight percentage of
Results
The bioluminescence and viable count analysis of bacteria associated with biofilms grown on CuAAC-based resins showed a significant reduction when compared to that quantified for the BisGMA-TEGDMA control resin discs. Fig. 2A displays the production of luciferase activity by S. mutans by non-disrupted biofilms associated with CuAAC-based resin discs and BisGMA-TEGDMA resin discs. Luciferase activity was measured at 2-min intervals, but only the 6-min interval is shown due to it having the
Discussion
For this study, we evaluated the ability of a monospecies biofilm to form on novel CuAAC-based resins. S. mutans is readily used as a model organism to evaluate dental restorative materials, particularly their antibacterial effects. Recently, Esteban Florez et al. [73] reported a non-disruptive evaluation of S. mutans biofilm formation on resin-based composites and showed correlation between luciferase activity and viable bacteria recovered from biofilms on the composites. In this study, we
Conclusions
Oral biofilms have been implicated in the failure of currently used dental materials; therefore, a dental material having improved mechanical performance and a reduction in biofilm formation may enhance the longevity of dental restoratives. In this study, we noted a statistically significant reduction in S. mutans biofilm bioburden on CuAAC resins and CuAAC-based microfilled composites, which in combination with CuAAC-based materials’ superior mechanical properties and significantly reduced
Acknowledgments
This study was supported in part by National Institutes of Health/NIDCR grant U01DE023774 and U01DE023777. We would like to thank Dr. Justin Merritt for kindly providing the luciferase expressing S. mutans that we used in this study.
References (86)
- et al.
Solving the etiology of dental caries
Trends Microbiol
(2015) - et al.
Microbiological studies of carious dentine from human teeth with irreversible pulpitis
Arch Oral Biol
(1991) - et al.
Amalgam or composite resin? Factors influencing the choice of restorative material
J Dent
(2012) - et al.
Longevity of posterior composite restorations: not only a matter of materials
Dent Mater
(2012) Resin composite—state of the art
Dent Mater
(2011)- et al.
Reasons for replacement of restorations in permanent teeth in general dental practice
Int Dent J
(2000) - et al.
Survival and reasons for failure of amalgam versus composite posterior restorations placed in a randomized clinical trial
J Am Dent Assoc
(2007) - et al.
The longevity of amalgam versus compomer/composite restorations in posterior primary and permanent teeth: findings From the New England Children’s Amalgam Trial
J Am Dent Assoc
(2007) - et al.
Eluted substances from unpolymerized and polymerized dental restorative materials and their Nernst partition coefficient
Dent Mater
(2010) Resin-based composite performance: are there some things we can’t predict?
Dent Mater
(2013)