Comparative analysis of Enterococcus faecalis biofilm formation on different substrates

INTRODUCTION: The aim of this study was to compare Enterococcus faecalis biofilm formation on different substrates. METHODS: Cell culture plates containing growth medium and E. faecalis (ATCC 29212) were used to grow biofilm on bovine dentin, gutta-percha, hydroxyapatite, or bovine bone. Substrat...

ver descrição completa

Na minha lista:
Detalhes bibliográficos
Principais autores: Guerreiro-Tanomaru, Juliane Maria, Faria Júnior, Norberto Batista de, Duarte, Marco Antonio Hungaro, Ordinola-Zapata, Ronald, Tanomaru-Filho, Mário
Formato: article
Idioma:eng
Publicado em:
Assuntos:
Biofilm
Confocal microscopy
Enterococcus faecalis
Endereço do item:https://repositorio.ufrn.br/jspui/handle/123456789/21750
Tags: Adicionar Tag
Sem tags, seja o primeiro a adicionar uma tag!
id ri-123456789-21750
record_format dspace
spelling ri-123456789-217502021-12-21T17:12:52Z Comparative analysis of Enterococcus faecalis biofilm formation on different substrates Guerreiro-Tanomaru, Juliane Maria Faria Júnior, Norberto Batista de Duarte, Marco Antonio Hungaro Ordinola-Zapata, Ronald Tanomaru-Filho, Mário Biofilm Confocal microscopy Enterococcus faecalis INTRODUCTION: The aim of this study was to compare Enterococcus faecalis biofilm formation on different substrates. METHODS: Cell culture plates containing growth medium and E. faecalis (ATCC 29212) were used to grow biofilm on bovine dentin, gutta-percha, hydroxyapatite, or bovine bone. Substrates were incubated at 37°C for 14 or 21 days, and the medium was changed every 48 hours. After the growth induction periods, specimens (n = 5 per group and per induction period) were stained by using Live/Dead, and the images were analyzed under a confocal microscope. The total biovolume (μm(3)), live bacteria biovolume (μm(3)), and substrate coverage (%) were quantified by using the BioImage_L software. Results obtained were analyzed by nonparametric tests (P = .05). RESULTS: Biofilm formation was observed in all groups. Gutta-percha had the lowest total biovolume at 14 days (P < .05) and hydroxyapatite the highest at 21 days (P < .05). No significant difference was observed in green biovolume at 14 days. At 21 days, however, hydroxyapatite had the highest volume (P < .05). The percentages of coverage were similar among all substrates at 21 days (P > .05), but at 14 days, bovine bone presented the highest coverage (P < .05). CONCLUSIONS: E. faecalis was capable of forming biofilm on all substrates during both growth periods; hydroxyapatite presented the highest rates of biofilm formation. The type of substrate influenced the biofilm characteristics, according to the parameters evaluated. 2017-01-26T12:13:32Z 2017-01-26T12:13:32Z 2013 article GUERREIRO-TANOMARU, Juliane Maria et al. Comparative analysis of Enterococcus faecalis biofilm formation on different substrates. Journal of Endodontics , v. 39, n. 3, p. 346-350, 2013. https://repositorio.ufrn.br/jspui/handle/123456789/21750 eng Acesso Aberto application/pdf
institution Repositório Institucional
collection RI - UFRN
language eng
topic Biofilm
Confocal microscopy
Enterococcus faecalis
spellingShingle Biofilm
Confocal microscopy
Enterococcus faecalis
Guerreiro-Tanomaru, Juliane Maria
Faria Júnior, Norberto Batista de
Duarte, Marco Antonio Hungaro
Ordinola-Zapata, Ronald
Tanomaru-Filho, Mário
Comparative analysis of Enterococcus faecalis biofilm formation on different substrates
description INTRODUCTION: The aim of this study was to compare Enterococcus faecalis biofilm formation on different substrates. METHODS: Cell culture plates containing growth medium and E. faecalis (ATCC 29212) were used to grow biofilm on bovine dentin, gutta-percha, hydroxyapatite, or bovine bone. Substrates were incubated at 37°C for 14 or 21 days, and the medium was changed every 48 hours. After the growth induction periods, specimens (n = 5 per group and per induction period) were stained by using Live/Dead, and the images were analyzed under a confocal microscope. The total biovolume (μm(3)), live bacteria biovolume (μm(3)), and substrate coverage (%) were quantified by using the BioImage_L software. Results obtained were analyzed by nonparametric tests (P = .05). RESULTS: Biofilm formation was observed in all groups. Gutta-percha had the lowest total biovolume at 14 days (P < .05) and hydroxyapatite the highest at 21 days (P < .05). No significant difference was observed in green biovolume at 14 days. At 21 days, however, hydroxyapatite had the highest volume (P < .05). The percentages of coverage were similar among all substrates at 21 days (P > .05), but at 14 days, bovine bone presented the highest coverage (P < .05). CONCLUSIONS: E. faecalis was capable of forming biofilm on all substrates during both growth periods; hydroxyapatite presented the highest rates of biofilm formation. The type of substrate influenced the biofilm characteristics, according to the parameters evaluated.
format article
author Guerreiro-Tanomaru, Juliane Maria
Faria Júnior, Norberto Batista de
Duarte, Marco Antonio Hungaro
Ordinola-Zapata, Ronald
Tanomaru-Filho, Mário
author_facet Guerreiro-Tanomaru, Juliane Maria
Faria Júnior, Norberto Batista de
Duarte, Marco Antonio Hungaro
Ordinola-Zapata, Ronald
Tanomaru-Filho, Mário
author_sort Guerreiro-Tanomaru, Juliane Maria
title Comparative analysis of Enterococcus faecalis biofilm formation on different substrates
title_short Comparative analysis of Enterococcus faecalis biofilm formation on different substrates
title_full Comparative analysis of Enterococcus faecalis biofilm formation on different substrates
title_fullStr Comparative analysis of Enterococcus faecalis biofilm formation on different substrates
title_full_unstemmed Comparative analysis of Enterococcus faecalis biofilm formation on different substrates
title_sort comparative analysis of enterococcus faecalis biofilm formation on different substrates
publishDate 2017
url https://repositorio.ufrn.br/jspui/handle/123456789/21750
work_keys_str_mv AT guerreirotanomarujulianemaria comparativeanalysisofenterococcusfaecalisbiofilmformationondifferentsubstrates
AT fariajuniornorbertobatistade comparativeanalysisofenterococcusfaecalisbiofilmformationondifferentsubstrates
AT duartemarcoantoniohungaro comparativeanalysisofenterococcusfaecalisbiofilmformationondifferentsubstrates
AT ordinolazapataronald comparativeanalysisofenterococcusfaecalisbiofilmformationondifferentsubstrates
AT tanomarufilhomario comparativeanalysisofenterococcusfaecalisbiofilmformationondifferentsubstrates
_version_ 1773961385553690624

Registros relacionados