Antimicrobial effect and microbial adherenceto maxillofacial prosthetic materials
Maxillofacial prostheses are used to restore the functional and anatomical defects of the maxillofacial region caused by trauma or tumour. It is beneficial to the patients if the materials used for the fabrication of the maxillofacial prostheses could demonstrate antimicrobial effects and resist...
Saved in:
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Thesis |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
2021
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | http://eprints.usm.my/49671/1/FARHANA%20RAHMAN-FINAL%20THESIS%20P-SGM000617%28R%29_24%20pages.pdf |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| Summary: | Maxillofacial prostheses are used to restore the functional and anatomical
defects of the maxillofacial region caused by trauma or tumour. It is beneficial to the
patients if the materials used for the fabrication of the maxillofacial prostheses could
demonstrate antimicrobial effects and resist microbial adherence hence reducing the
risk of infection. The objective of this study is to evaluate the antimicrobial effect,
surface roughness and microbial adherence of the locally produced material namely
modified polymethyl methacrylate (m-PMMA) against commercially produced
polymethyl methacrylate (c-PMMA), silicone A-2000 and silicone A-2186 which are
commonly used materials for maxillofacial prostheses. The microbial strains namely
Staphylococcus aureus (S. aureus), Streptococcus mutans (S. mutans) and Candida
albicans (C. albicans) were used in this study. Antimicrobial effect of maxillofacial
prosthetic materials was determined by agar diffusion test, whilst microbial
adherence was analysed using a direct colony-counting method and surface
roughness of tested materials was determined using profilometer. Scanning electron
microscopy (SEM) images were also used to examine the surface roughness and
microbial adherence. One-way ANOVA was used to analyse surface roughness and
Multivariate Analysis Of Variance (MANOVA) was used to analyse microbial
adherence. For antimicrobial activity, it was observed that all tested materials did not
inhibit the growth of all tested microbial strains. Surface roughness analysis showed
significant difference (p<0.05) between PMMA and silicone elastomers. There was
also significant difference in bacterial adherence on the tested materials in which
significantly higher colony-forming unit (CFU) of S. aureus and S. mutans were
observed on roughened surfaces namely silicone elastomers than that of PMMA
(p>0.017). No significant difference was observed in the adherence of C. albicans
between silicone elastomers and PMMA. It can be concluded that the presence of
fillers in m-PMMA may not be adequate to promote the release of antimicrobial
agents, however, m-PMMA showed less microbial adherence in comparison to other
tested materials. The findings also demonstrate that surface roughness of the
materials play an important role in microbial adherence. |
|---|