Zenuz A. T, Eslami H, Kafil H. S, Safari E, Mohammadi A. The Application of Antimicrobial Photodynamic Therapy on Pseudomonas Aeuroginosa and Enterococcus Fecalis using Heperecin and Methylene Blue Photosensitizers Biomed Pharmacol J 2016;9(2).
Manuscript received on :07-h -Marc
Manuscript accepted on :, -10-May
Published online on: 20-08-2016
How to Cite    |   Publication History
Views Views: (Visited 322 times, 1 visits today)    PDF Downloads: 954
The Application of Antimicrobial Photodynamic Therapy on Pseudomonas Aeuroginosa and Enterococcus Fecalis using Hypericin and Methylene Blue Photosensitizers

Ali Tagavi Zenuz1, Hosein Eslami1, Hossein Samadi Kafil2, Ebrahim Safari3, Milad Ghanizadeh4 and Arezou Mohammadi1*

1Department of Oral Medicine, Faculty of Dentistry, Tabriz University of Medical Sciences, Tabriz, IR Iran.

2Drug Applied Research Center, Tabriz University of Medical Sciences, Tabriz, IR Iran.

3Department of atomic and molecular Physics ,Faculty of physics university of Tabriz ,IR Iran.

4Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Tabriz University of Medical Sciences, Tabriz, IR Iran.

*Corresponding Author E-mail: Mohammadi_dds@yahoo.com

DOI : http://dx.doi.org/10.13005/bpj/957

Abstract:

The spread of multi-resistant bacterial strains is a fundamental threat to the public health and increases mortality rates and health care costs .Given that the main reason for resistance in bacteria is over use and misuse of antibiotic compounds. the photodynamic therapy has been introduced as new way to deal with resistant infections. In this empirical in vitro study, the strain of Enterococcus faecalis and the strain of Pseudomonas aeruginosa were prepared as standard strains. Two photosynthesizers of Methylene blue and hypericin as well as solutions of Enterococcus faecalis, and Pseudomonas aeruginosa were tested in 96-well plates. The irradiation process was conducted in the sterilized condition in the darkness as follows:First, they were irradiated for 30, 60 and 120 seconds using laser diodes with a wavelength of 630 nm. None of the colonies of bacteries grew in the presence of hypericin with and without laser irradiation and after 48 hours of incubation. The number of the colonies counted from Enterococcus bacteria in the presence of methylene blue and the radiation rate of both 2.5 and 5 mm Watt lasers were zero after 48 hours of incubation. However, the number of the colonies counted from the Enterococcus faecalis was 36 CFU/mL  in the case of exposure to methylene blue with the concentration of 25 µg/mL and without laser irradiation. The results showed that hypericin with and without laser therapy property has a bactericidal property against both Enterococcus faecalis and Pseudomonas aeruginosa.. Moreover, the use of methylene blue at a concentration of 25 µg/mL in the presence of 5 mm-watt laser, has a bactericidal property against Enterococcus faecalis, and reduces the number of Pseudomonas aeruginosa bacteria.

Keywords:

multi-resistant bacterial; Pseudomonas aeruginosa ; hypericumperforatum L.

Download this article as: 
Copy the following to cite this article:

Zenuz A. T, Eslami H, Kafil H. S, Safari E, Mohammadi A. The Application of Antimicrobial Photodynamic Therapy on Pseudomonas Aeuroginosa and Enterococcus Fecalis using Heperecin and Methylene Blue Photosensitizers Biomed Pharmacol J 2016;9(2).

Copy the following to cite this URL:

Zenuz A. T, Eslami H, Kafil H. S, Safari E, Mohammadi A. The Application of Antimicrobial Photodynamic Therapy on Pseudomonas Aeuroginosa and Enterococcus Fecalis using Heperecin and Methylene Blue Photosensitizers Biomed Pharmacol J 2016;9(2). Available from: http://biomedpharmajournal.org/?p=7505

Introduction

Today, the spread of multi-resistant bacterial strains is a fundamental threat to the public health and increases mortality rates and health care costs (1, 2).Given that the main reason for resistance in bacteria is overuse and misuse of antibiotic compounds, efforts are still underway to find an alternative way to deal with bacterial infections(1, 3) and the photodynamic therapy has been introduced as new way to deal with resistant infections (1-3).In this therapy method, sensitive photo-nodes(photosensitizer) are activatedunder light irradiation and oxygen free radicals are produced (4). The reactive oxygen radicals cause oxidation of lipids and proteins in the cytoplasmic and nucleic acid membrane and the damages lead to the death of micro-organisms (3). Since free radicals act totally nonspecificand deactivate various locations in the cell, so far, bacteria showed no resistanceagainst this method (5, 6).Methylene blue is a chemical dye, which belongs to phenothiazinium compounds and is used in the clinicalantimicrobial therapy (7).Methylene blue is considered as important antimicrobial lightactivator due to its less toxicity levels on human cells aswell as its high ability to produce reactive oxygen (7, 8).The positive charge of the compound at physiological pH enables the dye to be located in the membrane of gram-negative and gram-positive bacteria (9).Hypericin is a naturally- occurring polycyclic quinine and is obtained from hypericumperforatum L., which is a medicinal plant used in traditional medicine of Iran (3).The substance is a photosynthesizer(10), the anti-bacterial and anti-fangal properties of which have been seen in previous studies (3, 11) .In a study in 2011, Pereira et al. showed that photodynamic therapy,using the photosensitive effects of methylene blue,is a useful method for inhibiting the growth and elimination of oral biofilms, particularly candida albicans and S. aureus and Streptococcus mutans (12). Also, in a study in 2012, Kashef et al. showed that hypericin causes photodynamic inactivation of Enterococcus faecalis, Staphylococcus aureus and Escherichia coli (13).Considering the outbreak and spread of bacterial strains resistant to antibiotics and their role in infections, sometimes uncontrollable, the effect of PDT (photodynamic therapy) on the bacteria,including Pseudomonas aeruginosa and Enterococcus faecalis was evaluated and comparedin this study. Moreover, considering the type of the photosynthesizer is effective on the laser penetration and thus,the result of the PDTeffect, Pseudomonasaeruginosa and Enterococcus faecalis were separately used from two bphotosynthesizers (H. perforatum and methylene blue) and their effects were compared with each other in each of the cases.

Materials and Methods

In this empirical in vitro study, the strain of Enterococcus faecalis (MMH504) and the strain of Pseudomonas aeruginosa (ATCC27853) were prepared as standard strains from Scientific and Industrial Research of Iran.The bacteria were separately cultured in Brain Heart Infusion (BHI) medium.All media were maintained at the incubator at 37 ° C and under aerobic conditions for 48 hours.New colonies of Enterococcus faecalis, and Pseudomonas aeruginosawere suspended fromMüller-Hinton agar plates (MH) in BHI medium and the bacterial density was set at McFarland 0.5 opacity. Moreover, the liquid media containing the intended bacteria were maintained at the incubator at 37 ° C under aerobic conditions for 24 hours.Then logarithmic phase organisms were centrifuged at 3000g for 15 minutes and the liquid floating on the surface was removed. Then, the residue was washed 2 or 3 times using sterilized sodium phosphate buffer.The sterilized buffer was added and the cell suspension was prepared (almost 108CFU (Colony Forming Units)/ml (14).Methylene blue (MB) was purchased from Merk CO.To obtain the concentration of 25 μg / mL, the methylene blue powder was dissolved in the distilled water. Hypericumperforatum L. extract, which was purchased from Poursina CO, contained 0.1 mg / mL of hypericin . Two photosynthesizers of Methylene blue (25 and 50 μg / mL) andhypericin(100,50,20 and10 μg / mL) as well as solutions of Enterococcus faecalis, and Pseudomonas aeruginosa were tested in 96-well plates. In the first experiment, 100 μg / mL of hypericin and 25 μg / mL of methylene blue as well as solutions of Enterococcus faecalis, and Pseudomonas aeruginosa were separated from each other in 96-well plates (Table 1).

Table 1: Grouping of different environments in the first experiment

6 5 4 3 2 1
(L HMB) (L H + MB ) (LMB+H) (L+ H MB)  (L+ H + MB) (L+MB+H)

L=laser

MB=Methylene blue

H= hypericumperforatum L.

In the second experiment, the concentrations of 100 and 10 μg / mL  of hypericin and 25 μg / mL of methylene blue and solutions of  Enterococcus faecalis, and Pseudomonas aeruginosa were separated in 96-well plates. (Table 2)

Table 2: Grouping of different environments in the second test

8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1
(L H + MB ) (L+ H + MB ) (L HM ) (LH + MB) (LMB+H) (L+ H MB) (L+ H + MB) (L+MB+H)

L=laser

MB=Methylene blue

H= hypericumperforatum L.

In the third experiment, concentrations of 50 and 25 μg / mL of hypericin and 50 μg / mL of methylene blue and solutions of Enterococcus faecalis, and Pseudomonas aeruginosa were separated in 96-well plates . (Table 3)

8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1
(L H MB) (L H + MB) (LH + MB) (L H MB+) (L+MBH) (L+ H + MB) (L+ H + MB) (L+MB+H)

L=laser

MB=Methylene blue

H= hypericumperforatum L.

Sterile phosphate-buffered saline (PBS) was added for unification ofthe liquid surface in the wellsin all first, second and third experiments in laser and control groups.

In each well, 50 ΜL of the suspension of each bacterium was added to 50 μL of photosynthesizers. Before irradiation,samples were kept in the dark for 5 minutes. The irradiation process was conducted in the satirized condition in the darkness as follows:

First, they were irradiatedfor 30,60 and 120 seconds using laser diodes with a wavelength of 630 nm and a power of 5.2 mW 5(Brand: PASCO Scientific and model:LA-23891 V Made in China) with stability of  more than 95 %. The light source was fixed vertically to prevent spread of light in the adjacent wells. The distance between adjacent samples was equal to the width of two wells ,whichwere covered using black coating.

After these steps, plates were incubated in the first experiment; however, the incubation wan not performed in the second and third experiments and samples were diluted in the PBS. In order to assess the bacterial viability, 50 μL of each diluted sample was cultured in the Müller-Hinton agar and was incubated for 24 hours at relative space of CO 25%. After incubation, to count the total microbialcolonies,the intended microbe reached the specific volumeand then it was cultured on the surface of the medium. Later,the created colonies were counted after 24 hoursandthe final number of remaining microbes was assessed in CFU / mL (14, 15) for the prepared dilution.

These experiments were performed in triplicate and data obtained from the study were analyzed using descriptive statistics.

Findings

None of the colonies of Enterococcus faecalis, and Pseudomonas aeruginosa grew in the presence of hypericin with concentration of 100μg / mL with and without laser irradiation and after 48 hours of incubation. The number of the colonies counted from Enterococcus bacteria in the presence of methylene blue( 25μg / mL) and the radiation rate of both 5.2 and 5 mm Watt lasers were zero after 48 hours of incubation.However, the number of the colonies counted from the Enterococcus faecalis was CFU/mL 36in the case of exposure to methylene blue with the concentration of 25μg / mL and without laser irradiation. The experiments were repeated threetimes and the results were exactly the same each time(Table 4).

Table 4: Number of colonies of Pseudomonas aeruginosa, Enterococcus faecalis in the presence of hypericinand methylene blue with and without exposure to laser

Number of colonies(CFU / mL) in case of the exposure to 5 mm Watts laser Number of colonies (CFU / mL) in case of the exposure to 2.5mm Watts laser Number of colonies (CFU / mL) in the non-laser environment    Environment

            exposure

 

 

Photosynthesizer

EF PA EF PA EF PA
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Hypericin (100µg/mL)
0.0 20,000 0.0 50,000 36 80,000 methylene blue(25µg/mL)

PA: pseudomonas aeruginosa

EF: enterococcus faecalis

The above experiment was repeated once with one minute irradiation time and once more with two minutes irradiation time and the results were exactly similar to the 30-second irradiation. In the next step, microorganisms were irradiated at 30 seconds and were added into the culture medium without incubation. Then, the colonies were counted. Also at this stage, to determine the optimum concentration, hypericin(100, 50, 20 and 10µg/mL)and methylene blue(50 and 25 µg/mL)were evaluated separately.

The number of colonies was zero whenhypericin at concentration rate of 100 µg/mL was used, both in the presence and in the absence of laser. With a decrease in the concentration of hypericinto less than 100μg / mL, microorganisms grew in the culture medium and the number of colonies increases.  The number of colonies of Pseudomonas aeruginosa was 80000 CFU/mL when it was exposed to hypericin with concentration rate of 50 μg / mL(Table 5).Enterococcus faecalis was completely eliminated when it was exposed to hypericin with the concentration of 100 µg/mL. Moreover, the number of colonies was zero in the presence of laser and non-laser exposure.Again,microorganisms grew in the culture medium and the number of colonies increased with a decrease in the hypericin to less than 100μg / mL.

The number of colonies of Enterococcus faecalis was 100000 CFU/mL when it was exposed to hypericin with concentration rate of 50 μg / mL.These experiments were repeated three times and each time the results wereexactly the same. (Table 5)

Table 5: Number of colonies of Pseudomonas aeruginosa, Enterococcus faecalis in the presence of different concentrations of hypericin with and without exposure to laser

Number of colonies(CFU / mL) in case of the exposure to 5 mm Watts laser Number of colonies (CFU / mL) in case of the exposure to 2.5 mm Watts laser Number of colonies (CFU / mL) in the non-laser environment
EF PA EF PA EF PA Hypericin concentrations
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100µg/mL
5,000 200 100,000 50,000 100,000 80,000 50µg/mL
50,000 20,000 100,000 80,000 100,000 100,000 20 µg/mL
80,000 80,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 10 µg/mL

PA: pseudomonas aeruginosa

EF: enterococcus faecalis

The above experiment was repeated once with one minute irradiation time and once more with two minutes irradiation time and the results were exactly similar to the 30-second irradiation. With an increasein the concentration of methylene blue to the amount of more than 25μg / mL, the bacterial growth rate was increased in the culture medium.The number of colonies grown from P. aeruginosawas 80000 CFU / mLin the presence of methylene blue at a concentration of 25μg / mL.When the culture medium of the Pseudomonas aeruginosa was irradiated with 2.5 and 5 mm-watt laser, the number of counted colonies was reduced by the values of 50000 and 20000 CFU / mL, respectively.

The number of colonies grown from Enterococcus faecalis, which were exposed to 25μg / mL methylene blue, was 36CFU / mL,0 and 0 respectively innon-laser environment, radiation with 2.5 and 5 mm-watt lasers. These experiments were repeated three times and each time the results were exactly the same (Table 6)

Table 6: Number of colonies of Pseudomonas aeruginosa, Enterococcus faecalis in the presence of different concentrations of methylene blue with or without exposure to laser

Number of colonies(CFU / mL) in case of the exposure to 5 mm Watts laser Number of colonies (CFU / mL) in case of the exposure to 2.5 mm Watts laser Number of colonies (CFU / mL) in the non-laser environment
EF PA EF PA EF PA Methylene blue concentrations
0,0 20,000 0 50,000 36 80,000 25 µg/mL
0,0 80,000 100,000 100,000 80,000 100,000 50µg/mL

 

PA: pseudomonas aeruginosa

EF: enterococcus faecalis

The above experiment was repeated once with one minute irradiation time and once more with two minutes irradiation time and the results were exactly similar to the 30-second irradiation.

Discussion

Pseudomonas aeruginosa and enterococci faecalis have the ability to create antibiotic resistance and efforts are still underway to find a non-antibiotic treatment(16). This study was performed to compare the effects of photodynamic therapy on two microorganisms of Enterococcus faecalis, and Pseudomonas aeruginosain the presence of methylene blue and hypericin. The results showed that the use ofthe hypericin(100μg / mL)  with and without laser therapy, has the bactericidal property against both Enterococcus faecalis and Pseudomonas aeruginosa. In a study conducted in 2011, Ali et al. showed that hypericumperforatum L. extract has antibacterial property against Staphylococcus aureus and Pseudomonas aeruginosa (17). In another study conducted in 2007, Milosevic et al, showed that hypericumperforatum L. extract has antibacterial property against gram-positive and gram-negative bacteria, especially Pseudomonas family. Cervenka et al in 2006 (18) and Brantner and colleagues in 2006, investigated the anti-bacterial property of hypericin and respectively concluded that it has the anti-bacterial property against Arcobacter and Staphylococcus aureusstrains (19), which is consistent with the results of this study. In the present study, comparison of the concentrations of hypericin(100, 50, 20 and 10µg/mL) showed that reducing the hypericin concentrations to less than 100μg / mL, its anti-bacterial propertyand growth of micro-organisms in the culture mediumwill be reduced. In general, the use of hypericin(100μg / mL)with and without laser therapy, and hypericin (50μg / mL) in the presence of 5 mm-watt laser will lead to a reduction in its bactericidal property and the number of the bacteria. In a study conducted in 2012, Kashef et al. investigated the effect of hypericin (of 0.1, 0.3, 0.6 and 1 50μg / mL) and light irradiation time of(3, 5 and 10 minutes) on photodynamic inactivation ofmicroorganisms and concluded that hypericin along with a photo dose of 48 kg / s2 reduced the growth of microorganisms of Enterococcus faecalis, Staphylococcus aureus and Escherichia coli. It also has a bactericidal property, but Pseudomonas aeruginosa had relative resistance against other micro-organisms (13). However, in this study, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, compared with Enterococcus faecalis, was more sensitive to hypericin with and without laser therapy. The reason for this difference may be related to difference in the concentrations of hypericin in two studies or differences in the type of light source used.In another study, Rezusta and colleagues in 2011 concluded that the growth of different species of Candida fungus was significantly reduced under the influence of hypericin concentrations of 0. 625, 1.25, 2.5 and 40 μM and LED lamp emitting (18 mJ square cm). Furthermore, the antifungal effect was increased with an increase in concentrations of hypericin or light doses (20).

Luthi et al in another study in 2009 on the tooth decay-causing bacteria, showed that streptococcus sobrinus was eliminatedfollowing 15 minutes of incubation with a concentration of 2.5 µg/ml ofhypericinand illumination timeof 120 seconds. Moreover, they showed that a total of 99.9 percent of Streptococcus mutansbacterium was eliminated following 30 minutes incubation with a concentration of 10 µg/ml ofhypericin along with illumination frequency of 2 times, each for 120 seconds (21).Yow and colleagues,in a study in 2012, showed that the simultaneous application of hypericin and light irradiation cause adramatic reduction and significant changes in gram positive methicillin-sensitive and resistant S. aureus bacteria,but it had no effect on slowing the growth of the Escherichia coli, gram-negative bacterium (22 ).

In the present study, the application of 25 µg/ml methylene blue in the presence of 5 mm-watt laser has a bactericidal property and also it reduces the number of the enterococcus faecalis in the presence of the 2.5 mm/watt laser. However, the use of methylene blue at a concentration of 25 µg/mlwhether with 5 mm-watt laser or 2.5-watt mm laser, reduces the number of Pseudomonas aeruginosabacteria. Furthermore, with an increase in the concentration of methylene blue to more than 25μg / mL, the bacterial growth was increased in the culture medium. So, it can be concluded that the optimum concentrations of methylene blue is to 25μg / mL.The enterococcus faecalis, compared with Pseudomonas aeruginosa, showed more sensitivity to methylene blue with or without the laser therapy.Fontana et al. in 2009, measured the antibacterial effect of photodynamic therapy by methylene blue and concluded that a total og 63% of bacteria found in dental plaque suspension prepared from samples by photodynamic therapy were destroyed. But the microbial biofilms taken from the same plaque sample showed less sensitivity to the photodynamic therapy and only 32 % of bacteria were killed (15).

In another study, Street and colleagues in 2009 evaluated the effect photodynamic therapy on the P. aeruginosa in the presence of methylene blue. The results of this study showed that planktonic P. aeruginosa was completely eliminated in the presence of methylene blue and a laser with 15 kg / s2. In addition, a total of 99.9 percent of the 24 h biofilm viability and 48 h biofilm viability of the bacteria was eliminated in the presence of methylene blue and a laser with energy of 13.2 kg / s2 .With a two-fold increase in the exposure to the laser radiation, a greater reduction was observed in the amount of colonies counted from these bacteria (16). In a study in2009, Araújo and colleagues showed that a concentration of 25μg / mL of methylene blue led to the 73% inhibition of the growth of Streptococcus mutans bacteria in the presence of red light(23). However, Lozano and colleagues who studied the decay-causing Streptococcus mutans and sanguinis bacteria in 2015 showed that the a total of 99.99 percent of the bactria were eliminated in the presence of the methylene blue at a concentration of 2.5 μg / mL while being exposed to the white light with energy of 37 kg / s2 and the incubation duration of 60 seconds. In that study, with increasing the incubation time, more anti-bacterial property was observed. Also in that study, and in similar circumstances but with higher concentrations of methylene blue (80-160 μg / mL), the Candida albicans fungus was eliminated (6). After comparing the results obtained in this study with those from other studies, it can be concluded that the photodynamic efficacy of each photosynthesizer is different than the type of microorganism. Moreover, it must be noted that combining a variety ofphotosynthesizers with different light sources can be effective in the treatment of infections caused by a combination of microorganisms or microorganisms resistant to common antibiotic treatments.

Conclusion

The results showed that hypericin at a concentration of 100μg / mL with and without laser therapy property has a bactericidal property against both Enterococcus faecalis and Pseudomonas aeruginosa. The concentration of 50 μg / mL of hypericin also reduced the number of the bacteria in the presence of the 5 mm watt laser. Moreover, the use of methylene blue at a concentration of 25 μg / mL, in the presence of 5 mm-watt laser, has a bactericidal property against Enterococcus faecalis, and reduces the number of Pseudomonas aeruginosa bacteria.

References

  1. Sperandio FF, Huang YY, Hamblin MR. Antimicrobial photodynamic therapy to kill Gram-negative bacteria. Recent patents on anti-infective drug discovery. 2013;8(2):108-20.
  2. Nakonechny F, Firer MA, Nitzan Y, Nisnevitch M. Intracellular antimicrobial photodynamic therapy: a novel technique for efficient eradication of pathogenic bacteria. Photochemistry and photobiology. 2010; 86(6): 1350-5.
  3. Nafee N, Youssef A, El-Gowelli H, Asem H, Kandil S. Antibiotic-free nanotherapeutics: hypericin nanoparticles thereof for improved in vitro and in vivo antimicrobial photodynamic therapy and wound healing. International journal of pharmaceutics. 2013; 454(1): 249-58.
  4. Komine C, Tsujimoto Y. A small amount of singlet oxygen generated via excited methylene blue by photodynamic therapy induces the sterilization of Enterococcus faecalis. Journal of endodontics. 2013; 39(3): 411-4.
  5. Peloi LS, Soares RR, Biondo CE, Souza VR, Hioka N, Kimura E. Photodynamic effect of light-emitting diode light on cell growth inhibition induced by methylene blue. Journal of biosciences. 2008; 33(2): 231-7.
  6. Soria-Lozano P, Gilaberte Y, Paz-Cristobal MP, Perez-Artiaga L, Lampaya-Perez V, Aporta J, et al. In vitro effect photodynamic therapy with differents photosensitizers on cariogenic microorganisms. BMC microbiology. 2015; 15: 187.
  7. Sahu A, Choi WI, Lee JH, Tae G. Graphene oxide mediated delivery of methylene blue for combined photodynamic and photothermal therapy. Biomaterials. 2013; 34(26): 6239-48.
  8. Wainwright M. The development of phenothiazinium photosensitisers. Photodiagnosis and photodynamic therapy. 2005; 2(4): 263-72.
  9. Jori G, Fabris C, Soncin M, Ferro S, Coppellotti O, Dei D, et al. Photodynamic therapy in the treatment of microbial infections: basic principles and perspective applications. Lasers in surgery and medicine. 2006;38(5):468-81.
  10. Kleemann B, Loos B, Scriba TJ, Lang D, Davids LM. St John’s Wort (Hypericum perforatum L.) photomedicine: hypericin-photodynamic therapy induces metastatic melanoma cell death. PloS one. .2014; 7(9) e103762
  11. Saddiqe Z, Naeem I, Maimoona A. A review of the antibacterial activity of Hypericum perforatum L. Journal of ethnopharmacology. 2010; 131(3): 511-21.
  12. Pereira CA, Romeiro RL, Costa AC, Machado AK, Junqueira JC, Jorge AO. Susceptibility of Candida albicans, Staphylococcus aureus, and Streptococcus mutans biofilms to photodynamic inactivation: an in vitro study. Lasers in medical science. 2011; 26(3): 341-8.
  13. Kashef N, Borghei YS, Djavid GE. Photodynamic effect of hypericin on the microorganisms and primary human fibroblasts. Photodiagnosis and photodynamic therapy. 2013;10(2):150-5.
  14. Hakimiha N, Khoei F, Bahador A, Fekrazad R. The susceptibility of Streptococcus mutans to antibacterial photodynamic therapy: a comparison of two different photosensitizers and light sources. Journal of applied oral science : revista FOB. 2014; 22(2): 80-4.
  15. Fontana CR, Abernethy AD, Som S, Ruggiero K, Doucette S, Marcantonio RC, et al. The antibacterial effect of photodynamic therapy in dental plaque-derived biofilms. Journal of periodontal research. 2009; 44(6): 751-9.
  16. Street CN, Gibbs A, Pedigo L, Andersen D, Loebel NG. In vitro photodynamic eradication of Pseudomonas aeruginosa in planktonic and biofilm culture. Photochemistry and photobiology. 2009; 85(1): 137-43.
  17. Ali M, Arfan M, Ahmad H, Zaman K, Khan F, Amarowicz R. Comparative antioxidant and antimicrobial activities of phenolic compounds extracted from five Hypericum species. Food Technology and Biotechnology. 2011; 49(2): 205.
  18. Cervenka L, Peskova I, Foltynova E, Pejchalova M, Brozkova I, Vytrasova J. Inhibitory effects of some spice and herb extracts against Arcobacter butzleri, A. cryaerophilus, and A. skirrowii. Current microbiology. 2006; 53(5): 435-9.
  19. BRANTNER AH, SOVI K, PILEPI KH. Comparative phytochemical and antimicrobial investigations of Hypericum perforatum L. subsp. perforatum and H. perforatum subsp. angustifolium (DC.) Gaudin. Acta Pharm. 2006; 56: 359-67.
  20. Rezusta A, Lopez-Chicon P, Paz-Cristobal MP, Alemany-Ribes M, Royo-Diez D, Agut M, et al. In vitro fungicidal photodynamic effect of hypericin on Candida species. Photochemistry and photobiology. 2012; 88(3): 613-9.
  21. Lüthi M, Gyenge EB, Engstrüm M, Bredell M, Grätz K, Walt H, et al. Hypericin-and mTHPC-mediated photodynamic therapy for the treatment of cariogenic bacteria. Medical Laser Application. 2009; 24(4): 227-36.
  22. Yow CM, Tang HM, Chu ES, Huang Z. Hypericin-mediated photodynamic antimicrobial effect on clinically isolated pathogens. Photochemistry and photobiology. 2012; 88(3): 626-32.
  23. Araújo P, Teixeira K, Lanza L, Cortes M, Poletto L. In vitro lethal photosensitization of S. mutans using methylene blue and toluidine blue O as photosensitizers. Acta odontologica latinoamericana: AOL. 2008; 22(2): 93-7.
(Visited 322 times, 1 visits today)