Comparison of antibacterial and antibiofilm activity of bioactive glass compounds S53P4 and 45S5

Abstract

BackgroundBone loss and deformation due to damage caused by injury or recurrent invasive infections presents a major clinical obstacle. While bone substitute biomaterials promote osseous tissue regeneration, their application in sites complicated by microbial infections such as osteomyelitis, is limited. Bioactive glass biomaterials (Bioglass) have been shown to have efficient mechanisms of repairing the integrity of bone, while inhibiting growth of a range of bacterial strains. There are several commercially available bioactive glass compounds, each with a unique chemical composition. One compound in particular, S53P4, has demonstrated antimicrobial effects in previous studies but the antimicrobial activity of the parent compound 45S5 has not been investigated.ResultsTo assess whether antimicrobial activity is common among bioglass compounds, 45S5-the parent compound, was evaluated in comparison to S53P4 for antibacterial and antibiofilm effects against multiple strains of aerobic and anaerobic bacteria associated with various types of osteomyelitis. Experiments of antimicrobial effects in liquid cultures demonstrated that both compounds were antimicrobial against various microbial genera including S. gordonii, V. parvula, P. aeruginosa and MRSA; particles of the smallest size (32–125 µm) invariably showed the most robust antimicrobial capabilities. When employed against biofilms ecological biofilms grown on hydroxyapatite, 45S5 particles produced a stronger reduction in biofilm mass compared to S53P4 particles when considering small particle ranges.ConclusionWe found that 45S5 seems to be as effective as S53P4 and possibly even more capable of limiting bacterial infections. The efficacy of bioactive glass was not limited to inhibition of planktonic growth, as it also extended to bacterial biofilms. The increased antibacterial activity of 45S5 compared to S53P4 is true for a variety of size ranges.