The effect of standoff distance and surface roughness on biofilm disruption using cavitation
- Resource Type
- Authors
- Victoria Franke Stenport; Sarah A. Kuehne; Rachel Sammons; Qianxi Wang; Anthony Walmsley; Cecilia Johansson; Nina Vyas
- Source
- PLoS ONE
PLoS ONE, Vol 15, Iss 7, p e0236428 (2020)
- Subject
- 0301 basic medicine
Time Factors
Medical Implants
Scanning electron microscope
Diagnostic Radiology
0302 clinical medicine
Ultrasound Imaging
Surface roughness
Medicine and Health Sciences
Image Processing, Computer-Assisted
Electron Microscopy
Ultrasonics
Composite material
Titanium
Microscopy
Multidisciplinary
Radiology and Imaging
Biomaterial
Chemistry
Cavitation
Physical Sciences
Medicine
Engineering and Technology
Scanning Electron Microscopy
Research Article
Biotechnology
Chemical Elements
Materials science
Imaging Techniques
Surface Properties
Science
Biomaterial Implants
chemistry.chemical_element
Bioengineering
Image Analysis
Research and Analysis Methods
Microbiology
03 medical and health sciences
Diagnostic Medicine
Dental ultrasonic scaler
Titanium Implants
Dental Implants
Biofilm
Biology and Life Sciences
Ultrasonic scaler
Bacteriology
030206 dentistry
biochemical phenomena, metabolism, and nutrition
030104 developmental biology
chemistry
Biofilms
Medical Devices and Equipment
Bacterial Biofilms
- Language
- English
- ISSN
- 1932-6203
Effective biofilm removal from surfaces in the mouth is a clinical challenge. Cavitation bubbles generated around a dental ultrasonic scaler are being investigated as a method to remove biofilms effectively. It is not known how parameters such as surface roughness and instrument distance from biofilm affect the removal. We grew Strepotococcus sanguinis biofilms on coverslips and titanium discs with varying surface roughness (between 0.02-3.15 μm). Experimental studies were carried out for the biofilm removal using high speed imaging and image analysis to calculate the area of biofilm removed at varying ultrasonic scaler standoff distances from the biofilm. We found that surface roughness up to 2 μm does not adversely affect biofilm removal but a surface roughness of 3 μm caused less biofilm removal. The standoff distance also has different effects depending on the surface roughness but overall a distance of 1 mm is just as effective as a distance of 0.5 mm. The results show significant biofilm removal due to an ultrasonic scaler tip operating for only 2s versus 15-60s in previous studies. The technique developed for high speed imaging and image analysis of biofilm removal can be used to investigate physical biofilm disruption from biomaterial surfaces in other fields.