<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!DOCTYPE article  PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD Journal Publishing DTD v3.0 20080202//EN" "http://dtd.nlm.nih.gov/publishing/3.0/journalpublishing3.dtd"><article xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" dtd-version="3.0" xml:lang="en" article-type="research article"><front><journal-meta><journal-id journal-id-type="publisher-id">OJMM</journal-id><journal-title-group><journal-title>Open Journal of Medical Microbiology</journal-title></journal-title-group><issn pub-type="epub">2165-3372</issn><publisher><publisher-name>Scientific Research Publishing</publisher-name></publisher></journal-meta><article-meta><article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.4236/ojmm.2015.51001</article-id><article-id pub-id-type="publisher-id">OJMM-53859</article-id><article-categories><subj-group subj-group-type="heading"><subject>Articles</subject></subj-group><subj-group subj-group-type="Discipline-v2"><subject>Medicine&amp;Healthcare</subject></subj-group></article-categories><title-group><article-title>
 
 
  Bacterial Biofilm Formation on Resorbing Magnesium Implants
 
</article-title></title-group><contrib-group><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>lga</surname><given-names>Charyeva</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1"><sup>1</sup></xref><xref ref-type="corresp" rid="cor1"><sup>*</sup></xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Jessica</surname><given-names>Neilands</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff2"><sup>2</sup></xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Gunnel</surname><given-names>Svensäter</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff2"><sup>2</sup></xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Ann</surname><given-names>Wennerberg</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff3"><sup>3</sup></xref></contrib></contrib-group><aff id="aff3"><addr-line>Department of Prosthodontics, Faculty of Odontology, Malm&amp;amp;ouml University, Malm&amp;amp;ouml, Sweden</addr-line></aff><aff id="aff2"><addr-line>Department of Oral Biology, Faculty of Odontology, Malm&amp;amp;ouml University, Malm&amp;amp;ouml, Sweden</addr-line></aff><aff id="aff1"><addr-line>aap Biomaterials GmbH, Dieburg, Germany</addr-line></aff><author-notes><corresp id="cor1">* E-mail:<email>olga.charyeva@gmail.com(LC)</email>;</corresp></author-notes><pub-date pub-type="epub"><day>06</day><month>02</month><year>2015</year></pub-date><volume>05</volume><issue>01</issue><fpage>1</fpage><lpage>11</lpage><history><date date-type="received"><day>20</day>	<month>January</month>	<year>2015</year></date><date date-type="rev-recd"><day>accepted</day>	<month>3</month>	<year>February</year>	</date><date date-type="accepted"><day>6</day>	<month>February</month>	<year>2015</year></date></history><permissions><copyright-statement>&#169; Copyright  2014 by authors and Scientific Research Publishing Inc. </copyright-statement><copyright-year>2014</copyright-year><license><license-p>This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution International License (CC BY). http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/</license-p></license></permissions><abstract><p>
 
 
  Background: Implant-associated infections are a result of bacterial adhesion to an implant surface and subsequent biofilm formation at the implantation site. This study compares different magnesium materials based on their ability to resist bacterial adhesion as well as further biofilm formation. Material and Methods: The surfaces of four magnesium-based materials (Mg2Ag, Mg10Gd, WE43 and 99.99% pure Mg) were characterized using atomic force microscope. In addition, the samples were tested for their ability to resist biofilm formation. Planktonic bacteria of either 
  S. epidermidis or 
  E. faecalis were allowed to adhere to the magnesium surfaces for two hour followed by rinsing and, for 
  S. epidermidis, further incubation of 24, 72 and 168 h was carried out. Results: 
  E. faecalis had a significantly stronger adhesion to all magnesium surfaces compared to 
  S. epidermidis (p = 0.001). Biofilm growth of 
  S. epidermidis was different on various magnesium materials: the amount of bacteria increased up to 72 h but interestingly a significant decrease was seen at 168 h on Mg2Ag and WE43 surfaces. For pure Mg and Mg10Gd the biofilm formation reached plateau at 72 h. Surface characteristics of resorbable magnesium materials were changing over time, and the surface was generally less rough at 168 h compared to earlier time points. No correlation was found between the surface topology and the amount of adherent bacteria. Conclusion: In early stages of biofilm adhesion, no differences between magnesium materials were observed. However, after 72 h Mg2Ag and WE43 had the best ability to suppress 
  S. epidermidis’ biofilm formation. Also, bacterial adhesion to magnesium materials was not dependent on samples’ surface topology.
 
</p></abstract><kwd-group><kwd>Bacterial Biofilm</kwd><kwd> Magnesium</kwd><kwd> Surface Topology</kwd></kwd-group></article-meta></front><body><sec id="s1"><title>1. Introduction</title><p>Surgical site infection is one of the most commonly reported infection and accounts for 14% - 16% of all nosocomial infections among hospital patients [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.53859-ref1">1</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.53859-ref2">2</xref>] . It is a major problem in orthopedics leading to implant failure and in severe cases may result in amputation and mortality [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.53859-ref3">3</xref>] . Implant infections in dental and maxillofacial fields can lead to implant failure [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.53859-ref4">4</xref>] .</p><p>Implant-associated infections are the result of bacteria adhesion to an implant surface and subsequent biofilm formation at the implantation site [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.53859-ref3">3</xref>] . Sources of infectious bacteria include the environment of the operating room, surgical equipment, clothing worn by medical and paramedical staff, resident bacteria on the patient’s skin and bacteria already residing in the patient’s body [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.53859-ref3">3</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.53859-ref5">5</xref>] . Thus, secondary operations involving implant removal highly increases the risk of nosocomial infections.</p><p>Designing metallic implants that would resorb at the same rate as that of bone healing would minimize the risk of postoperative infections, decrease high costs associated with repeated surgeries, minimize recovery times, and thus promote higher quality of life to each individual patient. Magnesium has attracted much attention for its potential use in trauma and orthopedics fields due to its mechanical properties [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.53859-ref6">6</xref>] , biocompatibility [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.53859-ref7">7</xref>] , biodegradability and ability to stimulate new bone formation [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.53859-ref8">8</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.53859-ref9">9</xref>] . It was shown that magnesium has higher antibacterial activity than titanium, and that this activity is further strengthened in presence of silver [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.53859-ref10">10</xref>] . It is thus desirable to compare different magnesium alloys based on their bacteriostatic and bactericidal abilities.</p><p>It seems that bacterial adhesion to surface is highly dependent on surface roughness (S<sub>a</sub>) and developed surface area ratio (S<sub>dr</sub>) [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.53859-ref4">4</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.53859-ref11">11</xref>] . The level of bacterial adherence to moderately rough titanium surfaces (S<sub>dr</sub> 58%) was five times greater than to smooth titanium surfaces (S<sub>dr</sub> 2.8%) [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.53859-ref4">4</xref>] . Magnesium resorbs mainly by pitting corrosion [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.53859-ref12">12</xref>] which results in surface changes and might promote bacterial adhesion. Thus, it is important to compare whether any correlation between biofilm adhesion and surface changes which occur during resorbtion exist. Parameters describing spatial properties, like S<sub>ds</sub>, as well as hybrid properties, like S<sub>dr</sub>, might further differentiate surfaces with similar S<sub>a</sub> characteristics [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.53859-ref13">13</xref>] .</p><p>Enterococci, specifically Enterococcus faecalis, is the third most common cause of nosocomial infection, and most infections in hospitalized patients are associated with the use of indwelling medical devices [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.53859-ref14">14</xref>] . E. faecalis, a Gram-positive constituent of the human intestinal microbiome, has become a prominent pathogen of health care-associated infections over the past 3 decades [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.53859-ref15">15</xref>] . Between 1980 and 2008, the frequency of nosocomial infections caused by Enterococcus faecium, the other frequently encountered enterococcal pathogen, increased by 8.8% [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.53859-ref16">16</xref>] . E. faecalis and E. faecium infections together accounted for 16.0% of central line-associated bloodstream infections, 14.9% of catheter-associated urinary tract infections, and 11.2% of surgical site infections as reported by the United States National Healthcare Safety Network between 2006 and 2007 [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.53859-ref17">17</xref>] . E. faecalis is also the primary causative agent of enterococcal endocarditis [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.53859-ref18">18</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.53859-ref19">19</xref>] and is the most frequently isolated pathogen in secondary endodontic infections [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.53859-ref20">20</xref>] .</p><p>Staphylococcus epidermidis and Staphylococcus aureus represent, in absolute, the main causative agents of infection in orthopedics [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.53859-ref21">21</xref>] . S. epidermidis is the most frequently isolated member of the group of coagulase- negative staphylococci from implant-associated infections and they are associated with nosocomial infections [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.53859-ref3">3</xref>] . S. epiderimidis, a Gram-positive, non-spore forming facultative anaerobe that grows by aerobic respiration or fermentation, with diameters ranging from 0.5 - 1.5 mm, belong to the normal microbiota of the human skin. They are characterized by individual cocci, which divide in more than one plane to form grape-like clusters [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.53859-ref3">3</xref>] .</p><p>The aim of this study was to compare magnesium materials on their ability to resist bacterial adhesion as well as further biofilm formation. The surface changes were measured in order to find the possible correlation between biovolume and surface characteristics.</p></sec><sec id="s2"><title>2. Materials and Methods</title><sec id="s2_1"><title>2.1. Sample Production</title><p>The following materials were used to produce alloys for this study: magnesium (99.99%, Xinxiang Jiuli Magnesium Co. Ltd., China), yttrium (99.95%, Grirem Advanced Materials Co. Ltd., China), gadolinium (99.95%, Grirem Advanced Materials Co., Ltd., China), rare earth mixture (Grirem Advanced Materials Co. Ltd., China), and silver (99.99%, ESG Edelmetall-Handel GmbH &amp; Co. KG, Germany).</p><p>Three magnesium-based materials were produced: Mg2Ag (1.89% Ag, the rest was Mg), Mg10Gd (8.4% Gd, the rest was Mg), and WE43 (3.45% Y, 2.03% Nd, 0.84% Ce, the rest was Mg). Pure magnesium (99.97% Mg) was used as a control. The concentrations of magnesium Mg, Y, Nd and Ce were determined by spark emission spectrometer (Spectrolab M, Spektro, Germany) and the concentrations of Ag and Gd were determined by X-ray fluorescence spectrometer (Bruker AXS S4 Explorer, Bruker AXS GmbH., Germany). The materials were cast at HZG-MagIC.</p><p>The three magnesium alloys (Mg2Ag, Mg10Gd, WE43) were produced by permanent mould gravity casting. After melting the pure Mg, the melt was held at 720˚C and the preheated alloying elements were added with continuous stirring for 15 minutes. The melt was then poured into a preheated (550˚C) permanent steel mould treated with boron nitride. During the casting process cover gas was used (SF<sub>6</sub> and Ar mixture). The alloys were homogenized with a T4 heat treatment prior to extrusion in Ar atmosphere at 550˚C (Mg10Gd and WE43) and at 420˚C (Mg2Ag) for 6 h. Afterwards the alloys were extruded indirectly with an extrusion ratio of 4:25. The chamber of the extrusion machine was set to 370˚C and the billets (d = 30 mm) were preheated for one hour at 370˚C (Mg2Ag), at 390˚C (WE43) and at 430˚C (Mg10Gd). The extrusion speed was between 3 and 4.5 mm/sec. Pure Mg was casted by permanent mould direct chill casting. The cast billet (d = 110 mm) was extruded indirectly with an extrusion ratio of 1:84. The billet temperature was maintained at 340˚C and the speed of the extrusion was 0.7 mm/sec. Discs (10 mm diameter and 1.5 mm thickness) were machined from the extruded bars.</p></sec><sec id="s2_2"><title>2.2. Sample Sterilization</title><p>The samples were sonicated for 20 min in dry isopropanol, dried and gamma-sterilized at the BBF Sterilisationservice GmbH facility (Kernen, Germany) with a total dosage of 29 kGy.</p></sec><sec id="s2_3"><title>2.3. Bacterial Strains and Culture</title><p>The strains used for biofilm assays were E. faecalis ATCC 29212 and S. epidermidis C121, isolated from the external side of peritoneal dialysis catheter [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.53859-ref22">22</xref>] . All strains were routinely maintained on blood agar or in Todd- Hewitt broth (30 g・l<sup>−1</sup>; Difco Laboratories, Becton Dickinson &amp; Co, Sparks, MD) at 37˚C in 5% CO<sub>2</sub>.</p></sec><sec id="s2_4"><title>2.4. Biofilm Formation Assays</title><p>The magnesium discs were pre-coated in human serum for 18 h and then washed twice in 2 ml potassium phosphate buffer (PBS) for 10 min at 37˚C. Overnight broth cultures of S. epidermidis or E. faecalis was inoculated (1:10 dilution) into fresh, pre-warmed Todd-Hewitt broth and incubated at 37˚C in 5% CO<sub>2</sub> to the mid-expo- nential growth phase (optical density at 600 nm ≈ 0.6). The bacterial suspension was centrifuged at 3000 rpm for 10 min at 5˚C washed once in PBS and re-suspended in 10% human serum to a final concentration of approximately 1 &#215; 10<sup>8</sup> cells ml<sup>−1</sup>. The bacterial suspension was added to a microtiter plate with the magnesium discs and the bacteria were allowed to adhere for 2 h at 37˚C on a rocking platform at 300 cycles per hour. Following incubation for 2 h, the surfaces were rinsed twice in 2 ml PBS with pH 7.5 to remove loosely bound cells. S. epidermidis was then further incubated for 24, 72 and 168 h respectively. Adhered cells were stained using the Live/Dead Bac Light staining kit (Molecular Probes) and then visualized using a fluorescent microscope (Aristoplan, Leitz). Ten images per surface were captured with a digital camera and the number of bacteria on each image was counted by hand in a field area of 15,600 &#181;m<sup>2</sup>. All experiments were carried out in triplicates for each surface.</p></sec><sec id="s2_5"><title>2.5. Surface Roughness Characterization</title><p>Magnesium discs which were pre-coated in human serum for 18 h and then washed twice in 2 ml potassium phosphate buffer (PBS) for 10 min at 37˚C. The micro titer plates with these magnesium discs in human serum but without bacteria were incubated at 37˚C on a rotary shaker at 300 cycles per hour in 5% CO<sub>2</sub> for 2, 24, 72 and 168 h. The human serum was changed every second day. At different time points the discs were removed and allowed to dry at room temperature. Surface characterization was performed by atomic force microscope, AFM (XE-100, Park Systems Corp, Suwon, Korea). Measurement areas of 10 &#215; 10 &#181;m in three random positions were selected for each disc. The measurements were performed at a scan rate of 0.50 Hz. The images acquired from AFM were subjected to leveling and Gaussian filtering with a cut-off of 2.5 &#181;m was applied using the software MontainsMap<sup>&#174;</sup> Universal 6.2 (Digital Surf, Besancon, France) and 3-D parameters such as S<sub>a</sub>, S<sub>dr</sub>, S<sub>ds</sub> were analyzed.</p></sec><sec id="s2_6"><title>2.6. Statistical Analysis</title><p>Data were analyzed using the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS, v18, SPSS Inc, Chicago, USA). The signiﬁcance level was set at 5%. Standard analyses comparing different groups were conducted via one-way repeated measures analysis of variance (ANOVA). One-way repeated measures ANOVA was performed with the Dunn or Holm-Sidak post-hoc test. Since the data was non-normally distributed, Kruskal-Wallis test was performed to compare parameters between the groups. All graphs were plotted using SPSS.</p></sec></sec><sec id="s3"><title>3. Results</title><sec id="s3_1"><title>3.1. Adhesion of S. epidermidis and E. faecalis to Magnesium Surfaces</title><p>E. faecalis had significantly stronger adhesion than S. epidermidis with respect to the same samples (p = 0.001). Comparison between adhesion of S. epidermidis and E. faecalis to magnesium materials after 2 h of incubation is presented in <xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig1">Figure 1</xref>. This was true for all tested materials. The viability of the adhered cells of both E. faecalis and S. epidermidis was high (&gt;95% for both strains) and not statistically different from each other. No significant differences were found between materials within the same bacterial adhesion assay. In genereal, all magnesium samples were densely covered with E. faecalis, whereas S. epidermidis colonies were scarcely spread over the surface. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig2">Figure 2</xref> shows this trend for Mg2Ag.</p><fig id="fig1"  position="float"><label><xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig1">Figure 1</xref></label><caption><title> Adhesion of S. epidermidis and E. faecalis to magnesium materials after 2 h of incubation. (A) Live S. epidermidis; (B) Live E. faecalis; (C) Dead S. epidermidis; (D) Dead E. faecalis. *Field area represents 15,600 &#181;m<sup>2</sup></title></caption><graphic mimetype="image"   position="float"  xlink:type="simple"  xlink:href="http://html.scirp.org/file/1-2260161x6.png"/></fig></sec><sec id="s3_2"><title>3.2. S. epidermidis Growth over Time</title><p>Biofilm growth of S. epidermidis on magnesium materials over time is presented in <xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig3">Figure 3</xref>(a). In general, Mg2Ag and WE43 had similar pattern of the biofilm growth, whereas pure Mg was comparable to Mg10Gd. The number of adherent bacteria increased up to 72 h of incubation for all tested samples. Between 72 h and 168 h, the biofilm reached its plateau for pure Mg and Mg10Gd. Whereas, for Mg2Ag and WE43, the amount of adhered S. epidermidis decreased between 72 and 168 h.</p><p>The viability of the cells remained high (&gt;95%) at all time-points as shown by the low number of dead cells. There was no significant difference between the groups in the amount of dead S. epidermidis at the different time points. Even inside the group, no statistically significant differences were observed (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig3">Figure 3</xref>(b)). The pattern of S. epidermidis growth on pure Mg over time is shown in <xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig4">Figure 4</xref>.</p></sec><sec id="s3_3"><title>3.3. Characterisation of Surface Roughness</title><p>Surface topology was quantified starting from 0 h when bacteria were seeded onto the samples. It was observed that S<sub>a</sub> values for pure Mg significantly increased from 0 to 2 h, and then slightly decreased at 168 h (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig5">Figure 5</xref>). The surface of Mg2Ag stayed stable over time with no significant changes in S<sub>a</sub>. WE43 was comparable to Mg2Ag but with a significant S<sub>a</sub> decrease between 24 and 168 h. Significant decrease in S<sub>a</sub> was observed for Mg10Gd at 0 and 168 h.</p><fig id="fig2"  position="float"><label><xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig2">Figure 2</xref></label><caption><title> (A) S. epidermidis on Mg2Ag’s surface at 2 h; (B) E. faecalis on Mg2Ag’s surface at 2 h. Scale bar represents 30 &#181;m</title></caption><graphic mimetype="image"   position="float"  xlink:type="simple"  xlink:href="http://html.scirp.org/file/1-2260161x7.png"/></fig><fig id="fig3"  position="float"><label><xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig3">Figure 3</xref></label><caption><title> (A) Adherence of live S. epidermidis to magnesium surfaces over time; (B) Adherence of dead S. epidermidis to magnesium surfaces over time. *Field area represents 15,600 &#181;m<sup>2</sup></title></caption><graphic mimetype="image"   position="float"  xlink:type="simple"  xlink:href="http://html.scirp.org/file/1-2260161x8.png"/></fig><fig id="fig4"  position="float"><label><xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig4">Figure 4</xref></label><caption><title> Adherence of S. epidermidis to pure Mg at (A) 2 h; (B) 24 h; (C) 72 h; (D) 168 h. Scale bar represents 30 &#181;m</title></caption><graphic mimetype="image"   position="float"  xlink:type="simple"  xlink:href="http://html.scirp.org/file/1-2260161x9.png"/></fig><fig id="fig5"  position="float"><label><xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig5">Figure 5</xref></label><caption><title> S<sub>a</sub>, average surface roughness, of magnesium alloys over time</title></caption><graphic mimetype="image"   position="float"  xlink:type="simple"  xlink:href="http://html.scirp.org/file/1-2260161x10.png"/></fig><p>The pattern of S<sub>dr</sub> change over time<sub> </sub>was very similar to S<sub>a</sub> and is presented in <xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig6">Figure 6</xref>. S<sub>ds</sub> behavior was similar for all tested materials (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig7">Figure 7</xref>). In general, S<sub>ds</sub> decreased from 0 h to 2 h but then stayed quite stable over time. No correlation between the surface topology and amount of adherent bacteria were found in this study.</p></sec></sec><sec id="s4"><title>4. Discussion</title><p>Implant-associated infections are the result of bacteria adhesion to an implant surface and subsequent biofilm formation at the implantation site. This study compared magnesium materials on their ability to resist bacterial adhesion as well as further biofilm formation. The surface changes were measured in order to find the possible correlation between biovolume and surface characteristics.</p><p>Adhesion of E. faecalis was significantly better than adhesion of S. epidermidis to the same samples. This means that different bacterial strains have different ability to bind to magnesium surfaces under the same conditions which can be supported by previous studies on microbiology [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.53859-ref23">23</xref>] . In this study, no correlation was found between the surface topology and the ability of the bacteria to adhere to the magnesium surface, although this correlation was observed in previous research [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.53859-ref4">4</xref>] . Resorbtion of magnesium is a very complex chemical process. Surface topology is one of many factors that might influence cell and bacteria adherence and there are many more aspects that should be taken into account when analyzing magnesium’s performance in vitro.</p><p>It has been shown in previous studies that magnesium changes the surrounding environment; it makes pH more basic [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.53859-ref24">24</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.53859-ref25">25</xref>] which in turn stimulates precipitation of Ca<sup>2+</sup> ions from the solution [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.53859-ref24">24</xref>] - [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.53859-ref26">26</xref>] thereby changing the osmolality [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.53859-ref26">26</xref>] and thus reacts with the medium to form H<sub>2</sub> gas [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.53859-ref27">27</xref>] . The surrounding environment also has an effect on magnesium since it promotes formation of the protective layer on its surface [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.53859-ref27">27</xref>] . Protective layer slows down further degradation but is brittle and cleaves off from the surface quite easily [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.53859-ref28">28</xref>] . This means that the surface topology of magnesium materials is constantly changing. In this study, it was observed that in the first hours S<sub>a</sub> increased which can be explained by removal of surface irregularities and particles that are present on the surface. Later, the summits start to resorb and their tops break off from the surface</p><fig id="fig6"  position="float"><label><xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig6">Figure 6</xref></label><caption><title> S<sub>dr</sub>, a ratio between the 3-D measurement and a 2-D reference plane, of magnesium alloys over time</title></caption><graphic mimetype="image"   position="float"  xlink:type="simple"  xlink:href="http://html.scirp.org/file/1-2260161x11.png"/></fig><fig id="fig7"  position="float"><label><xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig7">Figure 7</xref></label><caption><title> S<sub>ds</sub>, the number of summits per unit area making up the surface, of magnesium alloys over time</title></caption><graphic mimetype="image"   position="float"  xlink:type="simple"  xlink:href="http://html.scirp.org/file/1-2260161x12.png"/></fig><p>decreasing the S<sub>ds</sub>. At later stages, the protective layer consisting of calcium phosphates and precipitated proteins from the medium is formed on the surface decreasing S<sub>a</sub> and S<sub>dr</sub> values.</p><p>Bacterial adhesion to magnesium surfaces is lower compared to titanium surfaces [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.53859-ref10">10</xref>] . Antibacterial properties of magnesium might be explained by the changes that magnesium promotes in its surroundings. As stated previously, magnesium makes pH basic through the release of OH<sup>− </sup>ions in contact with fluids [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.53859-ref24">24</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.53859-ref25">25</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.53859-ref27">27</xref>] . The higher pH inhibits enzyme activities that are essential to bacterial life, i.e. metabolism, growth, and cellular division [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.53859-ref29">29</xref>] .</p><p>It was shown in previous studies that S. epidermidis grows best in slightly more acidic pH close to around 6.35 but demonstrates the ability to growth in a range of pHs [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.53859-ref30">30</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.53859-ref31">31</xref>] . In this study S. epidermidis seemed to be resistant to alkali pH due to the effects of magnesium, as revealed by the increase in the bacterial number up to 72 h for all samples tested. After 72 h Mg2Ag and WE43 suppressed further bacterial growth on their surfaces. This might be due to the release of Ag<sup>2+</sup> ions which are known for their antibacterial properties [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.53859-ref10">10</xref>] . In case of WE43, the decreased number of adherent bacteria after 72 h might be due to high resorbtion rate of this alloy [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.53859-ref32">32</xref>] and consequent formation of H<sub>2</sub> gas which acts as a physical barrier for further biofilm growth. Pure Mg and Mg10Gd both had bacteriostatic effect after 72 h which might be either due to the change in the surrounding environment which became less favorable for S. epidermidis, or due to the high biovolume which suppresses further biofilm growth.</p><p>It was shown in previous studies that unlike S. epidermidis, E. faecalis can survive in highly alkaline pH, and some clinical isolates require 72 h at pH 12.5 to be killed [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.53859-ref33">33</xref>] . Mild alkaline mediums (pH 7 - 9) had no effect on E. faecalis vitality and high alkaline condition (pH &gt; 10) led to a significant decline in the survival rate of bacteria in one study [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.53859-ref34">34</xref>] . Also the biofilm cells of E. faecalis were more alkaline tolerant than corresponding planktonic cells [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.53859-ref34">34</xref>] . This can explain why there were more E. faecalis adhered to magnesium samples compared to S. epidermidis which are less resistant to alkali pH. Based on the previous research results it can be hypothesised that E. faecalis would have continued its biofilm growth if the experimental time would have been prolonged.</p><p>Dead E. faecalis and S. epidermidis were few in this study. The surface was predominantly occupied by live bacteria. Thus, magnesium seems to have no bactericidal effect. With time no increase in dead S. epidermidis was observed, their number was stable over the observation period.</p><p>Magnesium alloys seemed to suppress the adhesion of S. epidermidis in the first hours of experiment. Unlike S. epidermidis, E. faecalis binded to magnesium more readily at 2 h. One of the limitations of this study is that it does not compare magnesium to titanium surfaces and it is thus not possible to see whether magnesium is better in its ability to prevent biofilm adhesion than titanium. Resorption of magnesium alloys is a complex process which involves alterations of material’s surface and changes in the surrounding environment. Thus the task of the future research in this area would be determination of factors that suppresses bacterial vitality.</p></sec><sec id="s5"><title>5. Conclusion</title><p>Various bacterial strains had different adherence capacity to magnesium-based materials. There were no differences between different magnesium materials based on their ability to withstand biofilm formation at early stages up to 72 h. However, after 72 h Mg2Ag and WE43 had more favorable properties than pure Mg and Mg10Gd in their ability to suppress bacterial growth. These changes in biofilm growth and adherence could not be attributed to the changes in surface topology.</p></sec><sec id="s6"><title>Acknowledgements</title><p>This project receives funding from the People Programme (Marie Curie Actions) of the European Union's Seventh Framework Programme FP7 (2007-2013) under REA Grant Agreement No 289163.</p></sec><sec id="s7"><title>Conflict of Interest Statement</title><p>The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.</p></sec><sec id="s8"><title>NOTES</title></sec></body><back><ref-list><title>References</title><ref id="scirp.53859-ref1"><label>1</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Smyth, E.T. and Emmerson, A.M. (2000) Surgical Site Infection Surveillance. Journal of Hospital Infection, 45, 173-184. http://dx.doi.org/10.1053/jhin.2000.0736</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.53859-ref2"><label>2</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Smyth, E.T., McIlvenny, G., Enstone, J.E., Emmerson, A.M., Humphreys, H., Fitzpatrick, F., Davies, E., Newcombe, R.G. and Spencer, R.C. (2008) Four Country Healthcare Associated Infection Prevalence Survey 2006: Overview of the Results. Journal of Hospital Infection, 69, 230-248. http://dx.doi.org/10.1053/jhin.2000.0736</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.53859-ref3"><label>3</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Ribeiro, M., Monteiro, F.J. and Ferraz, M.P. (2012) Infection of Orthopedic Implants with Emphasis on Bacterial Adhesion Process and Techniques Used in Studying Bacterial-Material Interactions. Biomatter, 2, 176-194. http://dx.doi.org/10.4161/biom.22905</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.53859-ref4"><label>4</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Dorkhan, M., Chávez de Paz, L.E., Skep&amp;ouml, M., Svens&amp;aumlter, G. and Davies, J.R. (2012) Effects of Saliva or Serum Coating on Adherence of Streptococcus oralis Strains to Titanium. Microbiology, 158, 390-397. http://dx.doi.org/10.1099/mic.0.054536-0</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.53859-ref5"><label>5</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Frank, K.L., Guiton, P.S., Barnes, A.M., Manias, D.A., Chuang-Smith, O.N., Kohler, P.L., Spaulding, A.R., Hultgren, S.J., Schlievert, P.M. and Dunny, G.M. (2013) AhrC and Eep Are Biofilm Infection-Associated Virulence Factors in Enterococcus faecalis. Infection and Immunity, 81, 1696-1708. http://dx.doi.org/10.1128/IAI.01210-12</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.53859-ref6"><label>6</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Xin, Y., Hu, T. and Chu, P.K. (2011) In Vitro Studies of Biomedical Magnesium Alloys in a Simulated Physiological Environment: A Review. Acta Biomater, 7, 1452-1459. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.actbio.2010.12.004</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.53859-ref7"><label>7</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Gu, X., Zheng, Y., Cheng, Y., Zhong, S. and Xi, T. (2009) In Vitro Corrosion and Biocompatibility of Binary Magnesium Alloys. Biomaterials, 30, 484-498. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.biomaterials.2008.10.021</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.53859-ref8"><label>8</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Xu, L., Yu, G., Zhang, E., Pan, F. and Yang, K. (2007) In Vivo Corrosion Behavior of Mg-Mn-Zn Alloy for Bone Implant Application. Journal of Biomedical Materials Research Part A, 83, 703-711. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jbm.a.31273</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.53859-ref9"><label>9</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Witte, F., Kaese, V., Haferkamp, H., Switzer, E., Meyer-Lindenberg, A., Wirth, C.J. and Windhagen, H. (2005) In Vivo Corrosion of Four Magnesium Alloys and the Associated Bone Response. Biomaterials, 26, 3557-3563. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.biomaterials.2004.09.049</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.53859-ref10"><label>10</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Tie, D., Feyerabend, F., Müller, W.D., Schade, R., Liefeith, K., Kainer, K.U. and Willumeit, R. (2013) Antibacterial Biodegradable Mg-Ag alloys. European Cells and Materials Journal, 25, 284-298.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.53859-ref11"><label>11</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Bürgers, R., Gerlach, T., Hahnel, S., Schwarz, F., Handel, G. and Gosau, M. (2010) In Vivo and in Vitro Biofilm Formation on Two Different Titanium Implant Surfaces. Clinical Oral Implants Research, 21, 156-164.http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0501.2009.01815.x</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.53859-ref12"><label>12</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Witte, F., Kaese, V., Haferkamp, H., Switzer, E., Meyer-Lindenberg, A., Wirth, C.J. and Windhagen, H. (2005) In Vivo Corrosion of Four Magnesium Alloys and the Associated Bone Response. Biomaterials, 26, 3557-3563.http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.biomaterials.2004.09.049</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.53859-ref13"><label>13</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Stout, K.J., Sullivan, P.J., Dong, W.P., Mainsah, E., Luo, N., Mathia, T. and Zahouani, H. (1993) Development of Methods for Characterisation of Roughness in Three Dimensions. European Community Contract No 3374/1/0/170/90/2, University of Birmingham, Birmingham.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.53859-ref14"><label>14</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Paganelli, F.L., Willems, R.J., Jansen, P., Hendrickx, A., Zhang, X., Bonten, M.J. and Leavis, H.L. (2013) Enterococcus faecium Biofilm Formation: Identification of Major Autolysin AtlAEfm, Associated Acm Surface Localization, and AtlAEfm-Independent Extracellular DNA Release. mBio, 4, e00154-13. http://dx.doi.org/10.1128/mBio.00154-13</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.53859-ref15"><label>15</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Frank, K.L., Guiton, P.S., Barnes, A.M., Manias, D.A., Chuang-Smith, O.N., Kohler, P.L., Spaulding, A.R., Hultgren, S.J., Schlievert, P.M. and Dunny, G.M. (2013) AhrC and Eep Are Biofilm Infection-Associated Virulence Factors in Enterococcus faecalis. Infection and Immunity, 81, 1696-1708. http://dx.doi.org/10.1128/IAI.01210-12</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.53859-ref16"><label>16</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Kang, J., Sickbert-Bennett, E.E., Brown, V.M., Weber, D.J. and Rutala, W.A. (2012) Relative Frequency of Health Care-Associated Pathogens by Infection Site at a University Hospital from 1980 to 2008. American Journal of Infection Control, 40, 416-420. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ajic.2011.06.013</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.53859-ref17"><label>17</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Hidron, A.I., Edwards, J.R., Patel, J., Horan, T.C., Sievert, D.M., Pollock, D.A. and Fridkin, S.K., for the National Healthcare Safety Network Team and Participating National Healthcare Safety Network Facilities (2008) NHSN Annual Update: Antimicrobial-Resistant Pathogens Associated with Healthcare-Associated Infections: Annual Summary of Data Reported to the National Healthcare Safety Network at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2006-2007. Infection Control and Hospital Epidemiology, 29, 996-1011. http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/591861</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.53859-ref18"><label>18</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">McDonald, J.R., Olaison, L., Anderson, D.J., Hoen, B., Miro, J.M., Eykyn, S., Abrutyn, E., Fowler Jr., V.G., Habib, G., Selton-Suty, C., Pappas, P.A., Cabell, C.H., Corey, G.R., Marco, F. and Sexton, D.J. (2005) Enterococcal Endocarditis: 107 Cases from the International Collaboration on Endocarditis Merged Database. American Journal of Medicine, 118, 759-766. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.amjmed.2005.02.020</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.53859-ref19"><label>19</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Fernández Guerrero, M.L., Goyenechea, A., Verdejo, C., Roblas, R.F. and de Górgolas, M. (2007) Enterococcal Endocarditis on Native and Prosthetic Valves: A Review of Clinical and Prognostic Factors with Emphasis on Hospital-Acquired Infections as a Major Determinant of Outcome. Medicine, 86, 363-377.http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/MD.0b013e31815d5386</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.53859-ref20"><label>20</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Tennert, C., Fuhrmann, M., Wittmer, A., Karygianni, L., Altenburger, M.J., Pelz, K., Hellwig, E. and Al-Ahmad, A. (2014) New Bacterial Composition in Primary and Persistent/Secondary Endodontic Infections with Respect to Clinical and Radiographic Findings. Journal of Endodontics, 40, 670-677. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2013.10.005</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.53859-ref21"><label>21</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Campoccia, D., Montanaro, L. and Arciola, C.R. (2006) The Significance of Infection Related to Orthopedic Devices and Issues of Antibiotic Resistance. Biomaterials, 27, 2331-2339. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.biomaterials.2005.11.044</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.53859-ref22"><label>22</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Pihl, M., Chávez de Paz, L.E., Schmidtchen, A., Svens&amp;aumlter, G. and Davies, J.R. (2010) Effects of Clinical Isolates of Pseudomonas aeruginosa on Staphylococcus epidermidis Biofilm Formation. FEMS Immunology and Medical Microbiology, 59, 504-512.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.53859-ref23"><label>23</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Guo, L., He, X. and Shi, W. (2014) Intercellular Communications in Multispecies Oral Microbial Communities. Frontiers in Microbiology, 5, 328.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.53859-ref24"><label>24</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Witte, F., Hort, N., Vogt, C., Cohen, S., Kainer, K.U., Willumeit, R. and Feyerabend, F. (2008) Degradable Biomaterials Based on Magnesium Corrosion. Current Opinion in Solid State and Materials Science, 12, 63-72.http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cossms.2009.04.001</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.53859-ref25"><label>25</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Willumeit, R., Fischer, J., Feyerabend, F., Hort, N., Bismayer, U., Heidrich, S. and Mihailova, B. (2011) Chemical Surface Alteration of Biodegradable Magnesium Exposed to Corrosion Media. Acta Biomaterialia, 7, 2704-2715.http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.actbio.2011.03.004</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.53859-ref26"><label>26</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Feyerabend, F., Drücker, H., Laipple, D., Vogt, C., Stekker, M., Hort, N. and Willumeit, R. (2012) Ion Release from Magnesium Materials in Physiological Solutions under Different Oxygen Tensions. Journal of Materials Science: Materials in Medicine, 23, 9-24. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10856-011-4490-5</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.53859-ref27"><label>27</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Staiger, M.P., Pietak, A.M., Huadmai, J. and Dias, G. (2006) Magnesium and Its Alloys as Orthopedic Biomaterials: A Review. Biomaterials, 27, 1728-1734. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.biomaterials.2005.10.003</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.53859-ref28"><label>28</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Hornberger, H., Virtanen, S. and Boccaccini, A.R. (2012) Biomedical Coatings on Magnesium Alloys: A Review. Acta Biomaterialia, 8, 2442-2455. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.actbio.2012.04.012</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.53859-ref29"><label>29</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Prabhakar, A.R., Savita Hadakar, G. and Raju, O.S. (2012) Comparative Evaluation of pH and Antibacterial Effect of Various Calcium Hydroxide Combinations on E. faecalis and Its Effect on Root Strength: An in Vitro Study. Contemporary Clinical Dentistry, 3, 42-47. http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/0976-237X.94545</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.53859-ref30"><label>30</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">McDonald, W.A., Watts, J. and Bowmer, M.I. (1986) Factors Affecting Staphylococcus epidermidis Growth in Peritoneal Dialysis Solutions. Journal of Clinical Microbiology, 24, 104-107.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.53859-ref31"><label>31</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Korting, H.C., Lukacs, A., Vogt, N., Urban, J., Ehret, W., Ruckdeschel, G., Korting, H.C., Lukacs, A., Vogt, N., Urban, J., Ehret, W. and Ruckdeschel, G. (1992) Influence of the pH-Value on the Growth of Staphylococcus epidermidis, Staphylococcus aureus and Propionibacterium acnes in Continuous Culture. Zentralblatt für Hygiene und Umweltmedizin, 193, 78-90.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.53859-ref32"><label>32</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Gu, X.N., Zhou, W.R., Zheng, Y.F., Cheng, Y., Wei, S.C., Zhong, S.P., Xi, T.F. and Chen, L.J. (2010) Corrosion Fatigue Behaviors of Two Biomedical Mg alloys—AZ91D and WE43—In Simulated Body Fluid. Acta Biomaterialia, 6, 4605-4613. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.actbio.2010.07.026</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.53859-ref33"><label>33</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Weckwerth, P.H., Zapata, R.O., Vivan, R.R., Tanomaru Filho, M., Maliza, A.G. and Duarte, M.A. (2013) In Vitro Alkaline pH Resistance of Enterococcus faecalis. Brazilian Dental Journal, 24, 474-476.http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/0103-6440201301731</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.53859-ref34"><label>34</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Yan, P.F., Liang, J.P. and Jiang, Y.T. (2012) The Influence of Different Alkaline pH Conditions on Enterococcus faecalis in Planktonic and Biofilm Mode. Shanghai Journal of Stomatology, 21, 6-8.</mixed-citation></ref></ref-list></back></article>