This Article Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Reprints and Permissions Copyright Information Books from ASM Press MicrobeWorld Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Barbeau, J. Articles by Prevost, A. P. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Barbeau, J. Articles by Prevost, A. P. Agricola Articles by Barbeau, J. Articles by Prevost, A. P.

 Previous Article  |  Next Article 

Appl. Environ. Microbiol., 11 1996, 3954-3959, Vol 62, No. 11
Copyright © 1996, American Society for Microbiology

Multiparametric analysis of waterline contamination in dental units

J Barbeau, R Tanguay, E Faucher, C Avezard, L Trudel, L Cote and AP Prevost
Departement de stomatologie, Faculte de medecine dentaire, Universite de Montreal, Quebec, Canada. barbeauj@medent.umontreal.ca

Microbial contamination of dental unit waterlines is thought to be the result of biofilm formation within the small-bore tubing used for these conduits. Systematic sampling of 121 dental units located at the dental school of Universite de Montreal showed that none of the waterlines was spared from bacterial contamination. Multilevel statistical analyses showed significant differences between samples taken at the beginning of the day and samples taken after a 2-min purge. Differences were also found between water from the turbine and the air/water syringe. Random variation occurred mainly between measurements (80%) and to a lesser extent between dental units (20%). In other analyses, it was observed to take less than 5 days before initial bacterial counts reached a plateau of 2 x 10(5) CFU/ml in newly installed waterlines. Sphyngomonas paucimobilis, Acinetobacter calcoaceticus, Methylobacterium mesophilicum, and Pseudomonas aeruginosa were the predominant isolates. P. aeruginosa showed a nonrandom distribution in dental unit waterlines, since 89.5% of the all the isolates were located in only three of the nine clinics tested. Dental units contaminated by P. aeruginosa showed significantly higher total bacterial counts than the others. By comparison, P. aeruginosa was never isolated in tap water remote from or near the contaminated dental unit waterlines. In conclusion, dental unit waterlines should be considered an aquatic ecosystem in which opportunistic pathogens successfully colonize synthetic surfaces, increasing the concentration of the pathogens in water to potentially dangerous levels. The clinical significance of these findings in relation to routine dental procedures is discussed.

This article has been cited by other articles:

• Bartoloni, J. A., Porteous, N. B., Zarzabal, L. A. (2006). Measuring the validity of two in-office water test kits. Journal of the American Dental Association 137: 363-371 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
• Kelley, S. T., Theisen, U., Angenent, L. T., St. Amand, A., Pace, N. R. (2004). Molecular Analysis of Shower Curtain Biofilm Microbes. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 70: 4187-4192 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
• McDOWELL, J. W., PAULSON, D. S., MITCHELL, J. A. (2004). A simulated-use evaluation of a strategy for preventing biofilm formation in dental unit waterlines. Journal of the American Dental Association 135: 799-805 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
• KOHN, W. G., HARTE, J. A., MALVITZ, D. M., COLLINS, A. S., CLEVELAND, J. L., EKLUND, K. J., ADA Division of Science, (2004). Guidelines for infection control in dental health care settings--2003. Journal of the American Dental Association 135: 33-47 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
• PORTEOUS, N. B., REDDING, S. W., THOMPSON, E. H., GROOTERS, A. M., DE HOOG, S., SUTTON, D. A. (2003). Isolation of an unusual fungus in treated dental unit waterlines. Journal of the American Dental Association 134: 853-858 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
• Singh, R., Stine, O. C., Smith, D. L., Spitznagel, J. K. Jr., Labib, M. E., Williams, H. N. (2003). Microbial Diversity of Biofilms in Dental Unit Water Systems. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 69: 3412-3420 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
• DEPAOLA, L. G., MANGAN, D., MILLS, S. E., COSTERTON, W., BARBEAU, J., SHEARER, B., BARTLETT, J. (2002). A review of the science regarding dental unit waterlines. Journal of the American Dental Association 133: 1199-1206 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
• Donlan, R. M., Costerton, J. W. (2002). Biofilms: Survival Mechanisms of Clinically Relevant Microorganisms. Clin. Microbiol. Rev. 15: 167-193 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
• KNIGHT, J. S., DAVIS, S. B., McROBERTS, J. G. (2001). The effect of a dental unit waterline treatment regimen on the shear bond strength of resin-based composite. Journal of the American Dental Association 132: 615-619 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
• Rice, E. W., Reasoner, D. J., Johnson, C. H., DeMaria, L. A. (2000). Monitoring for Methylobacteria in Water Systems. J. Clin. Microbiol. 38: 4296-4297 [Full Text]  
• MILLS, S. E. (2000). THE DENTAL UNIT WATERLINE CONTROVERSY: DEFUSING THE MYTHS, DEFINING THE SOLUTIONS. Journal of the American Dental Association 131: 1427-1441 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
• Walker, J. T., Bradshaw, D. J., Bennett, A. M., Fulford, M. R., Martin, M. V., Marsh, P. D. (2000). Microbial Biofilm Formation and Contamination of Dental-Unit Water Systems in General Dental Practice. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 66: 3363-3367 [Abstract] [Full Text]