Bacterial Adhesion on Different Esthetic Orthodontic Archwires: An In Vitro Evaluation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract: Objectives: This study aims to evaluate bacterial adhesion on four different types of orthodontic archwires using two distinct enrichment media to compare microbial accumulation. Materials and Methods: Four groups of orthodontic archwires were selected for the study: Group A – PEEK (Polyetheretherketone; PEEK wires), Group B – Teflon-coated NiTi, Group C – Ceramic-coated NiTi, Group D – Conventional NiTi. Each archwire was sectioned into 3 cm segments, and 20 samples were prepared per group (n = 20). The wires were incubated in pooled unstimulated human saliva for 72 hours in two different enrichment media—Lysogeny Broth (LB) and Tris-EDTA (TE) broth—under sterile conditions. Following incubation, each wire was transferred to fresh broth, vortexed, and plated for microbial analysis. Aerobic bacteria were cultured on nutrient agar, and anaerobic bacteria on blood agar, followed by incubation at appropriate atmospheric conditions. Colony-forming units (CFUs) were counted after 24–48 hours. Morphological differentiation was done using Gram staining. Statistical analysis was performed using SPSS software (version XX). CFU counts were compared between groups using one-way ANOVA, followed by Tukey’s post-hoc test, with significance set at p < 0.05. Results: In Lysogeny Broth (LB) medium: Group A (PEEK) exhibited the lowest mean CFU counts for both aerobic and anaerobic bacteria, which was statistically significant compared to other groups (p < 0.001). This was followed by Group B (Teflon-coated NiTi) and Group C (ceramic-coated NiTi), which showed intermediate levels of bacterial adhesion.Group D (conventional NiTi) demonstrated the highest CFU counts for both aerobic and anaerobic cultures (p < 0.001). In Tris-EDTA (TE) broth medium: A similar trend was observed, with Group A (PEEK) again showing the least bacterial adhesion under both aerobic and anaerobic conditions (p < 0.001). However, a statistically significant increase in anaerobic bacterial adhesion was noted in Group C (ceramic-coated NiTi) compared to Group B (p = 0.04), suggesting material-dependent variation in anaerobic bacterial affinity. Group D continued to show the highest adhesion overall (p < 0.001). Conclusions: PEEK archwires demonstrated significantly lower bacterial adhesion compared to Teflon-coated, ceramic-coated, and conventional NiTi archwires in both Lysogeny broth and Tris-EDTA broth, suggesting superior resistance to microbial colonization. This reduced biofilm formation, particularly under anaerobic conditions, may lower the risk of plaque accumulation, enamel demineralization, and gingival inflammation during orthodontic treatment.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".