S. mutans biofilm model to evaluate antimicrobial substances and enamel demineralization

CARIOLOGY

S. mutans biofilm model to evaluate antimicrobial substances and enamel demineralization

Renzo Alberto Ccahuana-Vásquez^I; Jaime Aparecido Cury^II

^IPhD in Cariology - Piracicaba Dental School, University of Campinas (UNICAMP), Piracicaba, São Paulo, Brazil

^IIPhD, Professor of Biochemistry and Cariology - Piracicaba Dental School, University of Campinas (UNICAMP), Piracicaba, São Paulo, Brazil

^{Corresponding author}

ABSTRACT

The aim of this study was to validate a model of S. mutans biofilm formation, which simulated 'feast-famine' episodes of exposure to sucrose that occur in the oral cavity, showed dose-response susceptibility to antimicrobials and allowed the evaluation of substances with anticaries potential. S. mutans UA159 biofilms were grown for 5 days on bovine enamel slabs at 37°C, 10% CO₂. To validate the model, the biofilms were treated 2x/day with chlorhexidine digluconate (CHX) at 0.012, 0.024 and 0.12% (concentration with recognized anti-plaque effect) and 0.05% NaF (concentration with recognized anti-caries effect). CHX showed dose-response effect decreasing biomass, bacterial viability and enamel demineralization (p < 0.05). Whereas, 0.05% NaF did not show antimicrobial effect but had similar effect to that of 0.12% CHX decreasing enamel demineralization (p < 0.05). The model developed has potential to evaluate the effect of substances on biofilm growth and on enamel demineralization.

Descriptors:Streptococcus mutans; Biofilms; Chlorhexidine; Sucrose; Dental caries.

Introduction

Dental biofilm is an organized microbiologic community enclosed in a matrix of extracellular material and attached to dental surfaces.¹ Under some conditions, such as high carbohydrate consumption, the presence of a high amount of sugars can change the biochemical and microbiological composition of biofilm, leading to an increase in the proportion of pathogenic species and transforming healthy biofilm into cariogenic biofilm. Moreover, depending on the frequency this can lead to the formation and development of dental caries disease.²

In the oral cavity, the microorganisms in dental biofilm are exposed to large amounts of sugar during a short period of time and some microorganisms have the capacity to use these carbohydrates to produce acid, synthesize extracellular polysaccharides and store energy. After this rapid exposure to sugar, dental biofilm undergoes long periods of sugar starvation. These physiological conditions of bacterial growth are known as 'feast or famine' episodes³ and can cause microbiological selection strategies that increase the proportion of acid-tolerant species such as S. mutans in biofilm.^4,5

S. mutans are considered the most cariogenic microorganisms in dental biofilm due to their capacity to use dietary carbohydrates such as sucrose, to synthesize extracellular polysaccharides (EPS) and because of their acidogenic and aciduric properties.⁴ EPS are important virulence factors of S. mutans because they promote bacterial adherence to the tooth surface,^6,7 contribute to the structural integrity of dental biofilms,^8,9 change the porosity of the biofilm¹⁰ and consequently increase enamel demineralization.¹¹ Therefore, S. mutans biofilms have been used to evaluate their cariogenic properties due to difficulties of developing in vivo studies in controlled cariogenic situations.¹²

However, in most S. mutans biofilmmodels, the biofilm is grown under constant exposure to carbohydrates, which maintains the biofilm under constant acid stress, and does not simulate the "feast and famine" episodes of sugar exposure and pH-cycling that occur in the oral cavity.^13,14,15 In addition, these protocols do not use dental substrates to evaluate the effect of antimicrobial substances on dental demineralization caused by the attached biofilm. Furthermore, an important requirement of biofilmmodels is that they should show a dose-response effect against antimicrobial substances. With regard to oral biofilm models, chlorhexidine has been used as the 'gold standard' because it is considered the most efficient topical substance to reduce dental plaque, a type of biofilm.¹⁶ Moreover, it is recognized that although fluoride is the most important anticaries substance,¹⁷ its antibacterial effect is limited¹⁸ and the model should simulate the main mechanism of action of fluoride on dental caries.

Therefore, the aim of this study was to validate a S. mutans biofilm model that simulates exposure to sucrose that occurs in the oral environment, and allows the evaluation of the effect of antimicrobial substances on biofilm formation and on enamel demineralization.

Material and Methods

Experimental design

This S. mutans biofilm model was a modified version detailed by Koo et al.,¹³ (2003) with the main modifications being the use of dental substrate and the simulation of 'feast or famine' episodes of exposure to sucrose. Therefore, S. mutans UA159 biofilms were formed on saliva-coated bovine enamel slabs suspended vertically in ultrafiltered (10 kDa molecular weight cut-off membrane; Amicon) tryptone-yeast extract broth (UTYEB) at 37°C, 10% CO₂ for 5 days¹³ and exposed 1 min, 8x/day to 10% sucrose. After 48 h, the growth of some biofilms (n = 4) was stopped (baseline) and the others were grown for another 3 days and treated 2x/day for 1 min with one of the following solutions: 1) 0.9% NaCl (Control, n = 4), 2) 0.012% chlorhexidine digluconate (CHX, n = 4), 3) 0.024% CHX (n = 4), 4) 0.12% CHX (n = 4) and 5) 0.05% NaF (n = 4). The biomass, viable bacteria and biochemical composition of all biofilm samples were determined. Besides, the mineral loss of enamel slabs was assessed. The pH of the culture media was determined daily as an indicator of biofilm acidogenicity. For statistical evaluation each biofilm was considered an experimental block.

Enamel block preparation

Bovine incisor teeth, from which the roots were removed, were stored in 2% formol solution for a period of at least 30 days.¹⁹ The dental crown was fixed in an acrylic base, and with the aid of two parallel disks spaced 4 mm apart, a longitudinal slice was obtained from the central part of the dental specimen. Using two parallel disks spaced 7 mm apart, this slice was transversally cut. The dentin of this 7 x 4 mm dental slab was completely worn in grinder machine (Phoenix Beta, Buehler, Lake Bluf, IL, USA) using 400-grit aluminum oxide abrasive paper. Enamel surfaces were polished, flattened and baseline enamel surface hardness was determined on the outer enamel surface by making 3 indentations, spaced 100 μm from each other, using a Knoop indenter with a 25 g load for 5 s and a microhardness tester coupled to FM-ARS 900 software (Future-Tech FM, Kawasaki, Japan). Slabs presenting hardness of 331.69 ± 13.81 kg/mm² were randomly divided into six groups (n = 4).

Each slab was individually placed in 1 ml of a solution containing 0.06 mM P_i and 0.08 mM Ca⁺⁺ and sterilized by autoclaving (a previously standardized condition, data not published). The sterilized slabs were anchored vertically on metal devices and suspended in a 24-well culture plate.

Biofilm growth

UTYEB was used as culture media¹³ and depending on the experimental phase, the media contained 1% glucose, 1% sucrose or 0.1 mM glucose as described as follows. S. mutans UA159 colonies were transferred to UTYEB containing 1% glucose and incubated at 37°C, 10% CO₂ to reactivate the microorganisms. The slabs on which human salivary pellicle was formed, were individually positioned in wells containing 2.0 ml of the inoculum and were incubated at 37°C, 10% CO₂ to allow bacterial adhesion on the acquired pellicle. All these procedures were carried out according to Koo et al.¹³ (2003) but 8 h (previously standardized) after incubation the slabs were transferred to the fresh UTEYB containing 0.1 mM glucose (salivary basal concentration) and incubated for an additional 16 h at 37°C, 10% CO₂. The next day, the biofilms on enamel slabs were transferred to fresh UTYEB containing 0.1 mM glucose and were exposed 8x/day for 1 min to 10% sucrose (containing 1.23 mM Ca, 0.74 mM P_i and 0.023 μg F/mL, previously standardized) at predetermined times (8:00, 9:30, 11:00, 12:30, 14:00, 15:30, 17:00 and 18:30 h). This procedure was repeated for the next 3 days. After each sucrose exposure, the biofilms on enamel slabs were washed 3 times in 0.01% NaCl. The pH of the culture media was determined every 24 h and the media was replaced with a fresh solution.

Treatments

The CHX solutions were prepared from 20% chlorhexidine digluconate (Sigma, Steinheim, Germany) using sterilized distilled water. The solution of 0.05% NaF was prepared and sterilized by autoclaving. The treatments were performed 2x/day, after the first and the last sucrose exposure of the day. After each treatment, the biofilms on enamel slabs were washed 3 times in 0.9% NaCl.

Biofilm collection

After the assigned experimental time of biofilm growth, the enamel slabs containing the biofilms were washed 3 times in 0.9% NaCl and individually transferred to microcentrifuge tubes containing 1 ml of 0.9% NaCl. The tubes were sonicated at 7 W for 30 s (Branson, Sonifier 50, Danbury, CT USA) to detach the biofilms formed on the slabs.²⁰ The slabs were carefully removed from the suspension and stored to determine enamel demineralization. Aliquots of the suspension were used to determine biofilm bacterial viability, biomass (dry weight and total soluble proteins) and polysaccharides.

Biomass determination

Biofilm dry weight was determined according to Koo et al.¹³ (2003) from 200 μl of the suspension. To determine total soluble protein,²¹ 50 μl of the suspension was transferred to a microcentrifuge tube, to which the same volume of 2 M NaOH was added. The tube was vortexed and placed at 100°C at 15 min, centrifuged (10000 g for 10 min, 4°C) and the concentration of soluble protein was determined in the supernatant (DC Protein Assay, Bio-Rad, Hercules, Ca, USA).

Bacterial viability

An aliquot of 100 μl of the suspension was diluted in 0.9% NaCl in series up to 10^-7 and 2 drops of 20 μl of each dilution were inoculated on BHI agar (BD, Sparks, USA) to determine the number of viable microorganisms.²² The plates were incubated for 48 h at 37°C, 10% CO₂ (IG 150, Jouan incubator). CFU were counted and the results were expressed as CFU/mg of biofilm dry weight.²⁰

Polysaccharide analyses

From 100 μl of the suspension, insoluble and soluble extracellular polysaccharides were extracted according to Aires et al.²⁰ (2008) and analyzed for total carbohydrate according to Dubois et al.²³ (1956). The results were normalized by biofilm dry weight.

Enamel demineralization assessment

At the end of each experimental phase, the enamel slab surface hardness (SH) was again measured. One row of three adjacent indentations spaced at 100 μm was made 100 μm from the three baseline measurements. The mean values of the three baseline indentations and the three measurements after treatments were then averaged and the % SHL was calculated as follows:

Surface hardness loss (SHL) was used as indicator of enamel demineralization.¹¹

Statistical analysis

The assumptions of equality of variances and normal distribution of errors were checked for all the response variables tested and those that did not satisfy these conditions were transformed.²⁴ The relationship between CHX concentrations and the variable evaluated was estimated by regression analysis. When significant correlation was found, the data were submitted to ANOVA followed by Tukey's test, with the exception of acidogenicity, which was analyzed by repeated measures. Original data were used with the exception of viable bacteria counts, which were transformed to log₁₀. The software SPSS for Windows 15.0 (SPSS, Chicago, IL, USA) was used and the significance level was fixed at 5%.

Results

A statistically significant linear effect was found between CHX concentration and biofilm dry weight, total soluble proteins and viable bacteria, and enamel demineralization (Table 1), showing dose-response effect for these variables. No effect on polysaccharides was found.

As regards the pH of the culture media (Graph 1), the groups did not differ statistically after 48 h of the biofilm growth (p > 0.05). At 72 h of biofilm growth, the pH of media for the 0.12% CHX treatment was similar to that of the NaF 0.05% group (p > 0.05) but higher than that of the other groups (p < 0.05). At the 72 h and 120 h of biofilm growth, the pH of the NaF 0.05% was similar to that of the control group (p > 0.05) but lower than that of the other groups (p < 0.001).

The dry weight and protein values (Graph 2) showed that the biomass of the biofilm treated with 0.12% CHX had lower values than those of the control (p = 0.001 and 0.07, respectively) and it did not differ statistically from the baseline value (p = 0.11 and 0.99, respectively). However, the values of the biomass of biofilm treated with 0.05% NaF did not differ from those of the control (p = 0.209 and 0.758, respectively) but were higher than the baseline values (p = 0.001 and 0.045, respectively) (Graph 2).

The viable bacteria count in the biofilm (Graph 3), normalized by biofilm dry weight, was significantly lower (p < 0.001) for the treatment with 0.12% CHX when compared with the baseline and the control group. However, the viable bacteria counts of biofilm treated with 0.05% NaF did not differ from those of the control and the baseline values (p = 0.998 and 0.511, respectively).

As regards enamel demineralization (Graph 4), 0.12% CHX and 0.05% NaF significantly reduced the %SHL when compared with the control (p = 0.036 and 0.017, respectively), but these treatments did not differ between them (p = 0.99).

Discussion

Biofilm models are important tools to evaluate the biochemical and microbiological composition of biofilm formed under different conditions or the changes caused on the substratum surface on which the biofilm is attached. Therefore, the conditions of biofilm formation and the substratum used must be as close as possible to those of real life.

The improved model of S. mutans biofilm growth was validated and dose response effect of CHX on S. mutans biofilm was shown for most variables (Table 1). Therefore, the model is sufficiently sensitive to show biofilm and enamel demineralization changes in the presence of antimicrobial substances. The treatment 2x/day with 0.12% CHX showed a bactericidal effect, killing a large proportion of the viable bacteria in the biofilm (Graph 3), decreasing the biofilm capacity to produce acids (Graph 1), avoiding the increase in biofilm mass (dry weight and total proteins) (Graph 2) and consequently, the enamel demineralization process was stopped (Graph 4). This effect may be attributed to the ability of the CHX molecule to bind to the negatively charged bacterial cell surface, alter and disrupt the integrity of the cell membrane, causing bacterial death.^25,26 The concentration of 0.012% CHX had a bacteriostatic effect, not interfering in the viable bacteria counts, but affecting the acid production level, which was lower than that of the control group, but it was not able to prevent enamel demineralization. At this sublethal stage, the effects of CHX are reversible; removal of excess CHX by neutralizers allows the bacterial cell to recover.²⁶ This implies that the structural damage caused by 0.012% CHX was less than that caused by 0.024% and 0.12% CHX. The results found with the use of this model are supported by a clinical trial showing that 0.12% CHX is more effective in reducing S. mutans CFU than lower concentrations.²⁷

As opposed to CHX, fluoride did not show any effect on biofilm formation based on biomass (Graph 2) and viable bacteria counts (Graph 3). It also did not inhibit sucrose fermentation since the pH of the media did not differ when compared with the control (Graph 1), nevertheless, it reduced enamel demineralization (Graph 4). The findings are supported by the knowledge that at least 10 ppm of fluoride constantly in the media is necessary to inhibit sugar fermentation.²⁸ In this model, simulating the clinical use of mouthrinse, although the biofilm was treated with 225 ppm of fluoride, the duration time of treatment was only 1 min. Although 0.05% NaF showed absence of antimicrobial effect, it reduced enamel demineralization, suggesting that the main effect of F on caries control is physicochemical.^29,30

Moreover, the findings suggest that CHX did not have a direct effect on the synthesis of extracellular polysaccharides (Table 1). This result is apparently in disagreement with Koo et al.¹³ (2003) but it reflects the way in which the results were expressed. Koo et al.¹³ (2003) expressed the results in amount of polysaccharides found in the biofilm and in the present study the results were normalized by biofilm dry weight. Since the biofilm weight increased (Graph 2) but the viable bacteria decreased (Graph 3), the reduction in the amount of EPS should be attributed to bacterial death and not to a specific effect of CHX inhibiting the synthesis of extracellular polysaccharides.

In conclusion, the results suggest this improved S. mutans model can be used to test the effect of antimicrobial agents on biofilm growth and on enamel demineralization.

Acknowledgments

The manuscript was based on a thesis submitted by the first author to the Faculty of Dentistry of Piracicaba, UNICAMP, SP, Brazil, in partial fulfillment of the requirements of the Doctoral Program in Dentistry, concentration in Cariology. The study was supported by FAPESP (Proc. 2005/05143-8), CNPq (Proc. 475800/2007-9) and FUNCAMP (Conv. 4252).

Received for publication on May 10, 2010

Accepted for publication on May 24, 2010

• 1. Marsh PD. Are dental disease examples of ecological catastrophes? Microbiology. 2003 Feb;149(2):279-94.
• 2. Takahashi N, Nyvad B. Caries ecology revisited: Microbial dynamics and the caries process. Caries Res. 2008 Oct;42(6):409-18.
• 3. Carlsson J. Bacterial metabolism in dental biofilms. Adv Dental Res. 1997 Apr;11(1):75-80.
• 4. Loesche WJ. Role of Streptococcus mutans in a human dental decay. Microbiol Rev. 1986 Dec;50(4):353-80.
• 5. Marsh PD. Dental as plaque biofilm and a microbial community: implications for health and disease. BMC Oral Health. 2006 Jun;6 Suppl 1:S1-S14.
• 6. Rölla G. Why is sucrose so cariogenic? The role of glucosyltransferases and polysaccharides. Scand J Dent Res. 1989 Apr;97(2):115-9.
• 7. Schilling KM, Bowen WH. Glucans synthesized in situ experimental salivary pellicle function as specific bindings sites for Streptococcus mutans Infect Immun. 1992 Jan;60(1):284-95.
• 8. Koo H, Xiao J, Klein MI. Extracellular Polysaccharides matrix- An often forgotten virulence factor in oral biofilm research. Int J Oral Sci. 2009 Dec;1(4):229-34.
• 9. Xiao J, Koo H. Structural organization and dynamics of exopolysaccharide matrix and microcolonies formation by Streptococcus mutans in biofilms. J Appl Microbiol. 2010 Jun;108(6):2103-13.
• 10. Dibdin GH, Shellis RP. Physical and biochemical studies of Streptococcus mutans sediments suggest new factors linking the cariogenicity of plaque with its extracellular polysaccharide content. J Dent Res. 1988 Jun;67(6):890-5.
• 11. Cury JA, Rebelo MA, Del Bel Cury AA, Derbyshire MT, Tabchoury CP. Biochemical composition and cariogenicity of dental plaque formed in the presence of sucrose or glucose and fructose. Caries Res. 2000 Nov-Dec;34(6):491-7.
• 12. Sissons CH. Artificial dental plaque biofilm model systems. Adv Dent Res. 1997 Apr;11(1):110-26.
• 13. Koo H, Hayacibara MF, Schobel BD, Cury JA, Rosalen PL, Park YK et al Inhibition of Streptococcus mutans biofilm accumulation and polysaccharide production by apigenin and tt-farnesol. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2003 Nov;52(5):782-9.
• 14. Coenye T, Honraet K, Rigole P, Jimenez PN, Nelis HJ. In vitro inhibition of Streptococcus mutans biofilm formation on hydroxyapatite by subinhibitory concentrations of anthraquinones. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2007 Apr;51(4):1541- 4.
• 15. Deng DM, Hoogenkamp MA, Ten Cate JM, Crielaard W. Novel metabolic activity indicator in Streptococcus mutans biofilms. J Microbiol Methods. 2009 Apr;77(1):67-71.
• 16. Jones CG. Chlorhexidine: Is it still the gold standard? Periodontol 2000. 1997 Oct;15(1):55-62.
• 17. Marinho VCC. Evidence-based effectiveness of topical fluor-ides. Adv Dent Res. 2008 Jul;20(1):3-7.
• 18. Emilson CG. Potential efficacy of chlorhexidine against mutans streptococci and human dental caries. J Dent Res. 1994 Mar;73(3):682-91.
• 19. White DJ. Reactivity of Fluoride Dentifrice with Artificial Caries. I. Effects on subsurface lesion: F uptake, distribution, surface, hardening and remineralization. Caries Res. 1987;21:126-40.
• 20. Aires CP, Del Bel Cury AA, Tenuta LMA, Klein MI, Koo H, Duarte S et al Effect of sucrose and starch on dental biofilm formation and on dentin demineralization. Caries Res. 2008 Sep;42(5):380-6.
• 21. Lowry OH, Rosebrough NJ, Farr AL, Randall RJ. Protein measurement with the Folin phenol reagent. J Biol Chem. 1951 Nov;193(1):265-75.
• 22. Herigstad B, Hamilton M, Heersink J. How to optimize the drop plate method for enumerating bacteria. J Microbiol Methods. 2001 Mar;44(2):121-9.
• 23. Dubois M, Gilles KA, Hamilton JK, Rebers PA, Smith F. Colorimetric method for determination of sugars and related substances. Anal Chem. 1956 Mar;28(3):350-6.
• 24. Box GEP, Hunter WG, Hunter JS. Statistics for experimenters. New York: Wiley, c1978. 656 p.
• 25. Hugo WB, Longworth AR. Some aspects of the mode of action of chlorhexidine. J Pharm Pharmacol. 1964 Oct;16:655-62.
• 26. Rölla G, Melsen B. On the mechanism of the plaque inhibition by chlorhexidine. J Dent Res. 1975 Jun;54 (Spec Nş B):B57- 62.
• 27. Clark DC, Guest JL. The effectiveness of three different strengths of chlorhexidine mouthrinse. J Can Dent Assoc. 1994 Aug;60(8):711- 4.
• 28. Bradshaw DJ, Marsh PD, Hodgson RJ, Visser JM. Effect of glucose and fluoride on competition and metabolism within dental bacterial communities and biofilms. Caries Res. 2002 Mar-Apr; 36(2):81- 6.
• 29. ten Cate JM. Current concepts on the theories of the mechanism of action of fluoride. Acta Odontol Scand. 1999 Dec;57(6):325- 9.
• 30. Cury JA, Tenuta LMA. How to maintain a cariostatic fluor-ide concentration in the oral environment. Adv Dent Res. 2008 Jul;20(1):13-6.

Publication Dates

• Publication in this collection
  13 July 2010
• Date of issue
  June 2010

History

• Accepted
  24 May 2010
• Received
  10 May 2010