Journal of Pharmacy And Bioallied Sciences
Journal of Pharmacy And Bioallied Sciences Login  | Users Online: 1269  Print this pageEmail this pageSmall font sizeDefault font sizeIncrease font size 
    Home | About us | Editorial board | Search | Ahead of print | Current Issue | Past Issues | Instructions | Online submission




 
 Table of Contents  
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Year : 2021  |  Volume : 13  |  Issue : 5  |  Page : 532-536  

Antimicrobial efficacy of irreversible hydrocolloid impression impregnated with silver nanoparticles compared to surface disinfected impressions - An In vivo study


1 Department of Prosthodontics and Crown and Bridge, Rajah Muthiah Dental College and Hospital, Annamalai University, Chidambaram, Tamil Nadu, India
2 Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Sri Venkateshwaraa Dental College and Hospital, Puducherry, India

Date of Submission23-Sep-2020
Date of Decision23-Sep-2020
Date of Acceptance24-Nov-2020
Date of Web Publication05-Jun-2021

Correspondence Address:
Vaishnavi Rajendran
Department of Prosthodontics and Crown and Bridge, Rajah Muthiah Dental College and Hospital, Annamalai University, Chidambaram - 608 002, Tamil Nadu
India
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/jpbs.JPBS_565_20

Rights and Permissions
   Abstract 


Background: Routine disinfection procedures have shown to cause incomplete disinfection and detrimental effects on dimensional properties of the impression. Hence, self-disinfecting impression materials impregnated with antimicrobial agents were developed. Purpose: The purpose is to evaluate the antimicrobial efficacy of silver nanoparticles (AgNPs) impregnated in irreversible hydrocolloid (IH) impression material in in vivo conditions. Materials and Methods: This study comprised of four groups-IH impressions disinfected by immersion in 2% glutaraldehyde, IH impregnated with AgNPs of sizes 80–100 nm and 20–30 nm, nondisinfected impressions as control. Five impressions were made for each group and a total of 20 impression samples were made. The antimicrobial action of each sample was assessed by counting the number of colony forming units and by disc diffusion method. Results: The results were obtained and the data were statistically analyzed by Kruskal–Wallis test and tabulated. The results revealed that AgNPs of size 80–100 nm when impregnated in irreversible impression material showed effective antimicrobial action. Conclusion: The anti-microbial action of 80–100 nm AgNP impregnated IH impressions is comparable to that of impressions disinfected by immersion in 2% glutaraldehyde for 10 min.

Keywords: Antimicrobial action, impregnation, irreversible hydrocolloid, self-disinfecting, silver nanoparticles


How to cite this article:
Rajendran V, Suma K, Ali SA, Karthigeyan R, Kalarani G. Antimicrobial efficacy of irreversible hydrocolloid impression impregnated with silver nanoparticles compared to surface disinfected impressions - An In vivo study. J Pharm Bioall Sci 2021;13, Suppl S1:532-6

How to cite this URL:
Rajendran V, Suma K, Ali SA, Karthigeyan R, Kalarani G. Antimicrobial efficacy of irreversible hydrocolloid impression impregnated with silver nanoparticles compared to surface disinfected impressions - An In vivo study. J Pharm Bioall Sci [serial online] 2021 [cited 2021 Oct 27];13, Suppl S1:532-6. Available from: https://www.jpbsonline.org/text.asp?2021/13/5/532/317535




   Introduction Top


The contamination of irreversible hydrocolloid (IH) impressions from the oral cavity can cause cross infection to dental staff and laboratory personnel.[1],[2],[3],[4] Due to their hydrophilic nature, IH impressions were found to retain the microbes in them for a longer duration when compared to other impression materials. Several handling and disinfection protocols have been suggested for IH impressions.[5],[6],[7] The two main methods of disinfection of IH are spray and immersion methods. Certain drawbacks have been noticed with immersion and spray methods such as dimensional inaccuracy and incomplete disinfection, respectively.[8],[9] To overcome these drawbacks of spray and immersion methods of disinfection, impregnated IH impression materials have been developed.[10],[11],[12],[13],[14] The self-disinfectant impression materials also have an added advantage of reducing the time required for an extra chair side procedure of disinfection.

Few in vitro studies have reported that silver nanoparticles (AgNPs) impregnated IH impressions showed effective antimicrobial activity depending on the concentration and the size of the nanoparticles.[15],[16],[17],[18],[19] AgNPs of size 80–100 nm have shown significant antimicrobial action than other smaller particle sizes in IH impression material. This was in contrast with earlier literature.[20] Thus, there exists a controversy in the relationship between the size of AgNPs and their antimicrobial action. Few studies also assessed the physical properties of the IH impression material when incorporated with AgNPs. It was found that the physical properties were not adversely affected when AgNPs of optimal concentration were incorporated in IH impression material.[15],[16],[17],[18]

However, there are no in vivo studies available on the AgNPs impregnated IH impression material regarding their antibacterial action when used for making impressions in the oral cavity. Thus, the present in vivo study aims to check the antimicrobial efficacy of AgNPs of two different sizes incorporated in IH impressions and compare it to the surface disinfected impressions by immersion in 2% glutaraldehyde for 10 min.


   Materials and Methods Top


The ethical clearance for this study was obtained from the Institutional Human Ethics Committee (IHEC/586/2019) and informed consent was obtained from the subjects, after explaining the purpose and procedure of the study. Five healthy individuals under the age group of 24–30 years with intact dentition were selected as study subjects. The study subjects were devoid of any systemic or local complications. For this study, four groups were formed. Group I comprised of impressions disinfected by immersion in 2% glutaraldehyde, Group II and Group III comprised of IH impressions impregnated with 80–100 nm AgNps and 20–30 nm AgNps, respectively. Group IV comprised of nondisinfected control impressions.

Preparation of impregnated irreversible hydrocolloid impression material

Algitex (DPI) IH impression material was used. AgNPs of sizes 20–30 nm and 80–100 nm (Nano Research Lab, Jharkhand) and weight 2.5 wt.% were added in powder form to IH. This was subjected to ultrasonic vibration for 20 min, followed by ball milling at a speed of 200 rpm for 20 min to ensure homogeneous mixture of IH with AgNPs. Each sample was subjected to disinfection in hot air oven at 160°C for 1 h.

Impression making

Four IH impressions (one for each group) were made for each study subject in perforated autoclaved impression trays. Study samples were collected after 10 min from each group.

Microbiological tests

Colony forming units/ml method

The Sterile Phosphate-Buffered Saline was added on the surface of the impression. Then, sterile swab was taken from the impression surface and was directly spread on Mueller-Hinton agar (MHA) plates. The test plates were incubated for 48 h at 37°C. The colony forming unit (CFU)/ml were appreciated on the test plates after 48 h, and were counted for each sample [Figure 1], [Figure 2], [Figure 3], [Figure 4].
Figure 1: Colony forming unit count Group I - 2% glutaraldehyde disinfected

Click here to view
Figure 2: Group II - 80–100 nm silver nanoparticles impregnated irreversible hydrocolloid impression

Click here to view
Figure 3: Group III - 20–30 nm silver nanoparticles impregnated irreversible hydrocolloid impression

Click here to view
Figure 4: Group IV - nondisinfected control group

Click here to view


Disc diffusion method

In disc diffusion method, the test pathogens (Streptococcus mutans) were spread on MHA plates. Using Bard Parker knife, disc of diameter 4 mm was cut from the surface of each sample and placed on the agar plates. Each plate consisted of four samples. The agar plates were incubated for a period of 48 h at 37°C. After 48 h time period, the zone of inhibition (ZOI) was evaluated around each test sample [Figure 5].
Figure 5: Zone of inhibition formed around Group I and II

Click here to view


Statistical analysis

The values of the CFU/ml assessed and the zone of inhibition evaluated were tabulated. Systat software version 12, details, Cranes software, Banglore, India (company),Chicago (Headquarter) was used to perform the statistical analysis. Kruskal–Wallis test was performed to assess the data, a difference was found among the four groups and it was statistically significant. The P < 0.001. To compare the statistical difference between the groups, Kruskal–Wallis multiple comparison test was performed.


   Results Top


As shown in [Table 1], the group with 80–100 nm AgNPs showed a significant difference in the number of CFU/ml when compared to the control group and it showed comparable antimicrobial action to the standard 2% glutaraldehyde immersion disinfection group. The number of CFU/ml in 20–30 nm AgNPs incorporated in IH material was found to be lesser than the nondisinfected control group and >80–100 nm AgNPs impregnated group. Both the differences were statistically insignificant.

As shown in [Table 2], the 2% glutaraldehyde disinfected group and the group with 80–100 nm AgNPs impregnated in IH impression material showed the formation of zones of inhibition around their samples.
Table 1: Mean and standard deviation of colony forming units counted from the surface of irreversible hydrocolloid impressions

Click here to view
Table 2: Zone of inhibition evaluated by disc diffusion method for irreversible hydrocolloid impressions

Click here to view



   Discussion Top


In this study, it was found that AgNPs of size 80–100 nm when incorporated in IH impression material showed significant antimicrobial action when compared to the nondisinfected control group. The results of this study are in accordance with the in vitro study performed in 2016, in which AgNPs of size 80–100 nm used in two different brands of IH impression materials produced effective antimicrobial action without altering the physical properties of the material.[16] The AgNPs of size 80–100 nm exhibited superior antimicrobial action when compared to other particle sizes such as 10–20 nm, 30–50 nm, and 50–80 nm. This antimicrobial action was dose dependent.[18]

In this study, AgNPs of size 20–30 nm impregnated in IH impression material did not show any significant antimicrobial action compared to the control group. The results of this study are in accordance with the in vitro study conducted in 2018, in which AgNPs of different concentrations and sizes such as 10–20 nm, 30–50 nm, and 50–80 nm did not show any antimicrobial action against Escherichia coli, Staphylococcus Aureus, and Candida albicans.[18]

AgNPs of size 80–100 nm impregnated in IH impression material produced effective antimicrobial action and was comparable to the glutaraldehyde disinfected group. Disinfection by immersion in 2% glutaraldehyde has shown to cause complete eradication of microbes.[21],[22] However, this method has shown to cause detrimental effect on dimensional properties of the material, thus affecting the quality of resultant gypsum casts. It also has certain toxic effects due to the presence of the aldehyde group.[23],[24] The physical properties were found to be not altered in the in vitro studies on IH impregnated with AgNPs in optimum concentrations.[15],[17]

In a study, conducted in 2010, it was found that AgNPs of size 20–30 nm is the most effective particle size among other sizes without significant cytotoxicity suggesting their use as an effective antimicrobial agent,[20] which is in contrast with our study. The reason for the absence of antimicrobial action in the 20–30 nm group in the present study, could be due to the addition of AgNPs in powder form. When the particle size reduces, the aggregation of particles increases and reduces the surface area available for anti-microbial action.[25] The aggregation of the AgNPs of smaller size can be clearly seen in the in vitro study conducted in 2018.[18] Consequently, there is less aggregation in 80–100 nm due to increased particle size which makes increased amounts of AgNPs made available for antimicrobial action.

In many studies on this topic, disc diffusion method is used to assess the antimicrobial action. Agar diffusion method is reported to be the most efficient and qualitative test that shows the resistance of microbial growth against the particular antimicrobial agent used in the test. However, this test does not have the ability to distinguish between bacteriostatic and bactericidal effect.[26] S. mutans was chosen for disc diffusion method in this study, as it most commonly present oral microflora along with S. aureus. In CFU count, the number of viable bacterial cells retained in the impression after 10 min of impression making were counted.[27] The reduction in colonies from the control specified the bactericidal action of the sample, which could not be appreciated in disc diffusion method. There existed an inverse correlation between the two tests. The lesser the CFU count, the larger is the ZOI and which is equal to the antimicrobial efficacy of the particular group.

In this study, AgNPs of concentration 2.5 wt. % was used in both the particle sizes 20–30 nm and 80–100 nm. This was in accordance with the in vitro study performed in 2019, where it was concluded that 2.5 wt.% of AgNPs is an optimal concentration without affecting the physical properties of the material.[19] The mechanism of antibacterial action of AgNPs is not clearly known, though several authors have come with various theories. Formation of pits in cell wall of bacteria followed by disturbance in the membrane permeability and then leading to cell death, is one of the widely accepted concepts.[28]

Further studies are needed to assess the antimicrobial action of AgNPs impregnated in IH impression material in different concentrations. The colloidal form of AgNPs can reduce the problem of agglomeration and further studies are needed to prove its efficacy.


   Conclusion Top


Thus, from the findings of the present in vivo study, it can be concluded that:

  1. AgNPs of size 80–100 nm impregnated in IH impression material showed an effective antimicrobial action by both the CFU and zone of inhibition methods
  2. AgNPs of size 20–30 nm impregnated in IH impression material did not produce any antimicrobial action
  3. When compared with the impressions disinfected by immersion 2% glutaraldehyde for 10 min, the 80–100 nm AgNPs impregnated impressions produced comparable antimicrobial action
  4. IH impression material impregnated with AgNPs of size 80–100 nm can be used as an effective alternative to impressions disinfected with 2% glutaraldehyde by immersion method.


Financial support and sponsorship

Nil.

Conflicts of interest

There are no conflicts of interest.



 
   References Top

1.
Jennings KJ, Samaranayake LP. The persistence of microorganisms on impression materials following disinfection. Int J Prosthodont 1991;4:382-7.  Back to cited text no. 1
    
2.
Samaranayake LP, Hunjan M, Jennings KJ. Carriage of oral flora on irreversible hydrocolloid and elastomeric impression materials. J Prosthet Dent 1991;65:244-9.  Back to cited text no. 2
    
3.
Haralur SB, Al-Dowah OS, Gana NS, Al-Hytham A. Effect of alginate chemical disinfection on bacterial count over gypsum cast. J Adv Prosthodont 2012;4:84-8.  Back to cited text no. 3
    
4.
Leung RL, Schonfeld SE. Gypsum casts as a potential source of microbial cross-contamination. J Prosthet Dent 1983;49:210-1.  Back to cited text no. 4
    
5.
Council on Dental Therapeutics and Council on Prosthetic services and Dental Laboratory Relations. Guidelines for infection control in dental office and commercial dental laboratory. JADA 1985;110:969-72.  Back to cited text no. 5
    
6.
US Department of Health and Human Services. Preventing Transmission of Hepatitis B, AIDS and Herpes in Dentistry. Atlanta: US Department of Health and Human 1985.  Back to cited text no. 6
    
7.
British Dental Association Guidelines. Guide to Blood Borne Viruses and Control of Cross Infection in Dentistry. London: British Dental Association Publication; 1987.  Back to cited text no. 7
    
8.
Peutzfeldt A, Asmussen E. Effect of disinfecting solutions on accuracy of alginate and elastomeric impressions. Scand J Dent Res 1989;97:470-5.  Back to cited text no. 8
    
9.
Hamedi Rad F, Ghaffari T, Safavi SH. In vitro evaluation of dimensional stability of alginate impressions after disinfection by spray and immersion methods. J Dent Res Dent Clin Dent Prospects 2010;4:130-5.  Back to cited text no. 9
    
10.
Casemiro LA, Pires-de-Souza Fde C, Panzeri H, Martins CH, Ito IY. In vitro antimicrobial activity of irreversible hydrocolloid impressions against 12 oral microorganisms. Braz Oral Res 2007;21:323-9.  Back to cited text no. 10
    
11.
Tyler R, Tobias RS, Ayliffe GA, Browne RM. An in vitro study of the antiviral properties of an alginate impression material impregnated with disinfectant. J Dent 1989;17:137-9.  Back to cited text no. 11
    
12.
Tobias RS, Browne RM, Wilson CA. An in vitro study of the antibacterial and antifungal properties of an irreversible hydrocolloid impression material impregnated with disinfectant. J Prosthet Dent 1989;62:601-5.  Back to cited text no. 12
    
13.
Wang J, Wan Q, Chao Y, Chen Y. A self-disinfecting irreversible hydrocolloid impression material mixed with chlorhexidine solution. Angle Orthod 2007;77:894-900.  Back to cited text no. 13
    
14.
Amalan A, Ginjupalli K, Upadhya N. Evaluation of properties of irreversible hydrocolloid impression materials mixed with disinfectant liquids. Dent Res J (Isfahan) 2013;10:65-73.  Back to cited text no. 14
    
15.
Omikhoda M, Hasanzadeh N, Soleimani F, Shafie H. Antimicrobial and physical properties of alginate impression material incorporated with silver nanoparticles. Dent Res J 2019;16:372-6.  Back to cited text no. 15
    
16.
Ginjupalli K, Alla RK, Tellapragada C, Gupta L, Upadhya Perampalli N. Antimicrobial activity and properties of irreversible hydrocolloid impression materials incorporated with silver nanoparticles. J Prosthet Dent 2016;115:722-8.  Back to cited text no. 16
    
17.
Rungkiertsakul M, Sawaengkit P, Nisalak P, Thaweboon S, Churnjitapirom P. Physical properties of irreversible hydrocolloid impression material incorporated with silver-nanoparticles. Mater Sci Forum 2017:909;182-6.  Back to cited text no. 17
    
18.
Ginjupalli K, Shaw T, Tellapragada C, Alla R, Gupta L, Perampalli NU. Does the size matter? Evaluation of effect of incorporation of silver nanoparticles of varying particle size on the antimicrobial activity and properties of irreversible hydrocolloid impression material. Dent Mater 2018;34:e158-65.  Back to cited text no. 18
    
19.
de Castro DT, Kreve S, Oliveira VC, Alves OL, Dos Reis AC. Development of an impression material with antimicrobial properties for dental application. J Prosthodont 2019;28:906-12.  Back to cited text no. 19
    
20.
Martinez-Gutierrez F, Olive PL, Banuelos A, Orrantia E, Nino N, Sanchez EM, et al. Synthesis, characterization, and evaluation of antimicrobial and cytotoxic effect of silver and titanium nanoparticles. Nanomedicine 2010;6:681-8.  Back to cited text no. 20
    
21.
Look JO, Clay DJ, Gong K, Messer HH. Preliminary results from disinfection of irreversible hydrocolloid impressions. J Prosthet Dent 1990;63:701-7.  Back to cited text no. 21
    
22.
Kaplan BA, Goldstein GR, Boylan R. Effectiveness of a professional formula disinfectant for irreversible hydrocolloid. J Prosthet Dent 1994;71:603-6.  Back to cited text no. 22
    
23.
Johnson GH, Drennon DG, Powell GL. Accuracy of elastomeric impressions disinfected by immersion. J Am Dent Assoc 1988;116:525-30.  Back to cited text no. 23
    
24.
Takigawa T, Endo Y. Effects of glutaraldehyde exposure on human health. J Occup Health 2006;48:75-87.  Back to cited text no. 24
    
25.
Lara HH, Garza-Treviño EN, Ixtepan-Turrent L, Singh DK. Silver nanoparticles are broad-spectrum bactericidal and virucidal compounds. J Nanobiotechnology 2011;9:30.  Back to cited text no. 25
    
26.
Balouiri M, Sadiki M, Ibnsouda SK. Methods for in vitro evaluating antimicrobial activity: A review. J Pharm Anal 2016;6:71-9.  Back to cited text no. 26
    
27.
Hazan R, Que YA, Maura D, Rahme LG. A method for high throughput determination of viable bacteria cell counts in 96-well plates. BMC Microbiol 2012;12:259.  Back to cited text no. 27
    
28.
Sondi I, Salopek-Sondi B. Silver nanoparticles as antimicrobial agent: A case study on Escherichia coli as a model for Gram-negative bacteria. J Colloid Interface Sci 2004;275:177-82.  Back to cited text no. 28
    


    Figures

  [Figure 1], [Figure 2], [Figure 3], [Figure 4], [Figure 5]
 
 
    Tables

  [Table 1], [Table 2]



 

Top
 
 
  Search
 
    Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
    Access Statistics
    Email Alert *
    Add to My List *
* Registration required (free)  

 
  In this article
    Abstract
   Introduction
    Materials and Me...
   Results
   Discussion
   Conclusion
    References
    Article Figures
    Article Tables

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed472    
    Printed12    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded21    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal