Zaihan Ariffin , Yanti Johari , Farhana Rahman , Suharni Mohamad , Nafij Bin Jamayet , James Dudley
{"title":"四种颌面修复材料抗菌性能和表面粗糙度的比较评价","authors":"Zaihan Ariffin , Yanti Johari , Farhana Rahman , Suharni Mohamad , Nafij Bin Jamayet , James Dudley","doi":"10.1016/j.jobcr.2025.09.019","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objectives</h3><div>The adherence of microorganisms to the surfaces of maxillofacial prosthetic materials can cause surrounding tissue infections leading to discomfort, irritation and infection. It is therefore beneficial if maxillofacial prosthetic materials possess antimicrobial effects or resist microbial adherence. The purpose of this study was to compare the antimicrobial effect, surface roughness and microbial adherence of a locally produced modified polymethyl methacrylate maxillofacial prosthetic material with a commercially produced polymethyl methacrylate and two silicone elastomers against three microorganisms.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>Four study groups were formed, each with 10 samples (n = 10): modified polymethyl methacrylate (m-PMMA), commercially produced polymethyl methacrylate (c-PMMA), silicone A-2000 (A-2000), and silicone A-2186 (A-2186). The microorganisms tested against the four prosthetic materials were <em>Staphylococcus aureus (S. aureus), Streptococcus mutans (S. mutans), and Candida albicans (C. albicans)</em>. The antimicrobial effect, microbial adherence and surface roughness were assessed and scanning electron microscopy images examined surface roughness and microbial adherence.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>None of the tested materials showed antimicrobial activity against the evaluated microbial strains. Microbial adherence was significantly higher on silicone elastomers, with greater colony-forming units of both <em>S. aureus</em> and <em>S. mutans</em> compared to PMMA (p < 0.017). No significant difference was observed in <em>C. albicans</em> adherence between the silicone elastomers and PMMA. Surface roughness analysis revealed a statistically significant difference between PMMA and silicone elastomers (p < 0.05), with the silicones exhibiting greater roughness.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>The fillers in m-PMMA may inhibit the release of antimicrobial agents. The locally produced m-PMMA demonstrated less microbial adherence in comparison to other tested materials.</div></div><div><h3>Clinical implications</h3><div>The locally produced m-PMMA was associated with less microbial adherence in comparison to other tested materials and has potential to reduce the risk of infection.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":16609,"journal":{"name":"Journal of oral biology and craniofacial research","volume":"15 6","pages":"Pages 1607-1613"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparative evaluation of antimicrobial properties and surface roughness of four maxillofacial prosthetic materials\",\"authors\":\"Zaihan Ariffin , Yanti Johari , Farhana Rahman , Suharni Mohamad , Nafij Bin Jamayet , James Dudley\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.jobcr.2025.09.019\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Objectives</h3><div>The adherence of microorganisms to the surfaces of maxillofacial prosthetic materials can cause surrounding tissue infections leading to discomfort, irritation and infection. It is therefore beneficial if maxillofacial prosthetic materials possess antimicrobial effects or resist microbial adherence. The purpose of this study was to compare the antimicrobial effect, surface roughness and microbial adherence of a locally produced modified polymethyl methacrylate maxillofacial prosthetic material with a commercially produced polymethyl methacrylate and two silicone elastomers against three microorganisms.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>Four study groups were formed, each with 10 samples (n = 10): modified polymethyl methacrylate (m-PMMA), commercially produced polymethyl methacrylate (c-PMMA), silicone A-2000 (A-2000), and silicone A-2186 (A-2186). The microorganisms tested against the four prosthetic materials were <em>Staphylococcus aureus (S. aureus), Streptococcus mutans (S. mutans), and Candida albicans (C. albicans)</em>. The antimicrobial effect, microbial adherence and surface roughness were assessed and scanning electron microscopy images examined surface roughness and microbial adherence.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>None of the tested materials showed antimicrobial activity against the evaluated microbial strains. Microbial adherence was significantly higher on silicone elastomers, with greater colony-forming units of both <em>S. aureus</em> and <em>S. mutans</em> compared to PMMA (p < 0.017). No significant difference was observed in <em>C. albicans</em> adherence between the silicone elastomers and PMMA. Surface roughness analysis revealed a statistically significant difference between PMMA and silicone elastomers (p < 0.05), with the silicones exhibiting greater roughness.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>The fillers in m-PMMA may inhibit the release of antimicrobial agents. The locally produced m-PMMA demonstrated less microbial adherence in comparison to other tested materials.</div></div><div><h3>Clinical implications</h3><div>The locally produced m-PMMA was associated with less microbial adherence in comparison to other tested materials and has potential to reduce the risk of infection.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":16609,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of oral biology and craniofacial research\",\"volume\":\"15 6\",\"pages\":\"Pages 1607-1613\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-09-24\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of oral biology and craniofacial research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2212426825002325\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"Medicine\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of oral biology and craniofacial research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2212426825002325","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
Comparative evaluation of antimicrobial properties and surface roughness of four maxillofacial prosthetic materials
Objectives
The adherence of microorganisms to the surfaces of maxillofacial prosthetic materials can cause surrounding tissue infections leading to discomfort, irritation and infection. It is therefore beneficial if maxillofacial prosthetic materials possess antimicrobial effects or resist microbial adherence. The purpose of this study was to compare the antimicrobial effect, surface roughness and microbial adherence of a locally produced modified polymethyl methacrylate maxillofacial prosthetic material with a commercially produced polymethyl methacrylate and two silicone elastomers against three microorganisms.
Methods
Four study groups were formed, each with 10 samples (n = 10): modified polymethyl methacrylate (m-PMMA), commercially produced polymethyl methacrylate (c-PMMA), silicone A-2000 (A-2000), and silicone A-2186 (A-2186). The microorganisms tested against the four prosthetic materials were Staphylococcus aureus (S. aureus), Streptococcus mutans (S. mutans), and Candida albicans (C. albicans). The antimicrobial effect, microbial adherence and surface roughness were assessed and scanning electron microscopy images examined surface roughness and microbial adherence.
Results
None of the tested materials showed antimicrobial activity against the evaluated microbial strains. Microbial adherence was significantly higher on silicone elastomers, with greater colony-forming units of both S. aureus and S. mutans compared to PMMA (p < 0.017). No significant difference was observed in C. albicans adherence between the silicone elastomers and PMMA. Surface roughness analysis revealed a statistically significant difference between PMMA and silicone elastomers (p < 0.05), with the silicones exhibiting greater roughness.
Conclusions
The fillers in m-PMMA may inhibit the release of antimicrobial agents. The locally produced m-PMMA demonstrated less microbial adherence in comparison to other tested materials.
Clinical implications
The locally produced m-PMMA was associated with less microbial adherence in comparison to other tested materials and has potential to reduce the risk of infection.
期刊介绍:
Journal of Oral Biology and Craniofacial Research (JOBCR)is the official journal of the Craniofacial Research Foundation (CRF). The journal aims to provide a common platform for both clinical and translational research and to promote interdisciplinary sciences in craniofacial region. JOBCR publishes content that includes diseases, injuries and defects in the head, neck, face, jaws and the hard and soft tissues of the mouth and jaws and face region; diagnosis and medical management of diseases specific to the orofacial tissues and of oral manifestations of systemic diseases; studies on identifying populations at risk of oral disease or in need of specific care, and comparing regional, environmental, social, and access similarities and differences in dental care between populations; diseases of the mouth and related structures like salivary glands, temporomandibular joints, facial muscles and perioral skin; biomedical engineering, tissue engineering and stem cells. The journal publishes reviews, commentaries, peer-reviewed original research articles, short communication, and case reports.