Cargando…

Comparison of Titanium and PEEK Medical Plastic Implant Materials for Their Bacterial Biofilm Formation Properties

This study investigated two of the most commonly used CAD–CAM materials for patient-specific reconstruction in craniomaxillofacial surgery. The aim of this study was to access the biofilm formation of Staphylococcus aureus, Streptococcus mutans, Enterococcus faecalis, and Escherichia coli on titaniu...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Sarfraz, Sonia, Mäntynen, Pilvi-Helinä, Laurila, Marisa, Rossi, Sami, Leikola, Junnu, Kaakinen, Mika, Suojanen, Juho, Reunanen, Justus
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9504047/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36146003
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/polym14183862
_version_ 1784796117996666880
author Sarfraz, Sonia
Mäntynen, Pilvi-Helinä
Laurila, Marisa
Rossi, Sami
Leikola, Junnu
Kaakinen, Mika
Suojanen, Juho
Reunanen, Justus
author_facet Sarfraz, Sonia
Mäntynen, Pilvi-Helinä
Laurila, Marisa
Rossi, Sami
Leikola, Junnu
Kaakinen, Mika
Suojanen, Juho
Reunanen, Justus
author_sort Sarfraz, Sonia
collection PubMed
description This study investigated two of the most commonly used CAD–CAM materials for patient-specific reconstruction in craniomaxillofacial surgery. The aim of this study was to access the biofilm formation of Staphylococcus aureus, Streptococcus mutans, Enterococcus faecalis, and Escherichia coli on titanium and PEEK medical implant materials. Two titanium specimens (titanium grade 2 tooled with a Planmeca CAD–CAM milling device and titanium grade 5 tooled with a computer-aided design direct metal laser sintering device (CAD-DMLS)) and one PEEK specimen tooled with a Planmeca CAD–CAM milling device were studied. Bacterial adhesion on implants was evaluated in two groups (saliva-treated group and non-saliva-treated group) to imitate intraoral and extraoral surgical routes for implant placement. The PEEK medical implant material showed higher bacterial adhesion by S. aureus, S. mutans, and E. coli than titanium grade 2 and titanium grade 5, whereas E. faecalis showed higher adhesion to titanium as compared to PEEK. Saliva contamination of implants also effected bacterial attachment. Salivary coating enhanced biofilm formation by S. aureus, S. mutans, and E. faecalis. In conclusion, our findings imply that regardless of the implant material type or tooling techniques used, salivary coating plays a vital role in bacterial adhesion. In addition, the majority of the bacterial strains showed higher adhesion to PEEK than titanium.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9504047
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-95040472022-09-24 Comparison of Titanium and PEEK Medical Plastic Implant Materials for Their Bacterial Biofilm Formation Properties Sarfraz, Sonia Mäntynen, Pilvi-Helinä Laurila, Marisa Rossi, Sami Leikola, Junnu Kaakinen, Mika Suojanen, Juho Reunanen, Justus Polymers (Basel) Article This study investigated two of the most commonly used CAD–CAM materials for patient-specific reconstruction in craniomaxillofacial surgery. The aim of this study was to access the biofilm formation of Staphylococcus aureus, Streptococcus mutans, Enterococcus faecalis, and Escherichia coli on titanium and PEEK medical implant materials. Two titanium specimens (titanium grade 2 tooled with a Planmeca CAD–CAM milling device and titanium grade 5 tooled with a computer-aided design direct metal laser sintering device (CAD-DMLS)) and one PEEK specimen tooled with a Planmeca CAD–CAM milling device were studied. Bacterial adhesion on implants was evaluated in two groups (saliva-treated group and non-saliva-treated group) to imitate intraoral and extraoral surgical routes for implant placement. The PEEK medical implant material showed higher bacterial adhesion by S. aureus, S. mutans, and E. coli than titanium grade 2 and titanium grade 5, whereas E. faecalis showed higher adhesion to titanium as compared to PEEK. Saliva contamination of implants also effected bacterial attachment. Salivary coating enhanced biofilm formation by S. aureus, S. mutans, and E. faecalis. In conclusion, our findings imply that regardless of the implant material type or tooling techniques used, salivary coating plays a vital role in bacterial adhesion. In addition, the majority of the bacterial strains showed higher adhesion to PEEK than titanium. MDPI 2022-09-15 /pmc/articles/PMC9504047/ /pubmed/36146003 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/polym14183862 Text en © 2022 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Article
Sarfraz, Sonia
Mäntynen, Pilvi-Helinä
Laurila, Marisa
Rossi, Sami
Leikola, Junnu
Kaakinen, Mika
Suojanen, Juho
Reunanen, Justus
Comparison of Titanium and PEEK Medical Plastic Implant Materials for Their Bacterial Biofilm Formation Properties
title Comparison of Titanium and PEEK Medical Plastic Implant Materials for Their Bacterial Biofilm Formation Properties
title_full Comparison of Titanium and PEEK Medical Plastic Implant Materials for Their Bacterial Biofilm Formation Properties
title_fullStr Comparison of Titanium and PEEK Medical Plastic Implant Materials for Their Bacterial Biofilm Formation Properties
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of Titanium and PEEK Medical Plastic Implant Materials for Their Bacterial Biofilm Formation Properties
title_short Comparison of Titanium and PEEK Medical Plastic Implant Materials for Their Bacterial Biofilm Formation Properties
title_sort comparison of titanium and peek medical plastic implant materials for their bacterial biofilm formation properties
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9504047/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36146003
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/polym14183862
work_keys_str_mv AT sarfrazsonia comparisonoftitaniumandpeekmedicalplasticimplantmaterialsfortheirbacterialbiofilmformationproperties
AT mantynenpilvihelina comparisonoftitaniumandpeekmedicalplasticimplantmaterialsfortheirbacterialbiofilmformationproperties
AT laurilamarisa comparisonoftitaniumandpeekmedicalplasticimplantmaterialsfortheirbacterialbiofilmformationproperties
AT rossisami comparisonoftitaniumandpeekmedicalplasticimplantmaterialsfortheirbacterialbiofilmformationproperties
AT leikolajunnu comparisonoftitaniumandpeekmedicalplasticimplantmaterialsfortheirbacterialbiofilmformationproperties
AT kaakinenmika comparisonoftitaniumandpeekmedicalplasticimplantmaterialsfortheirbacterialbiofilmformationproperties
AT suojanenjuho comparisonoftitaniumandpeekmedicalplasticimplantmaterialsfortheirbacterialbiofilmformationproperties
AT reunanenjustus comparisonoftitaniumandpeekmedicalplasticimplantmaterialsfortheirbacterialbiofilmformationproperties