Antimicrobial Activity of PET-Silver Nanocomposite Filaments

Abstract:

This study evaluated the antimicrobial activity of PET-Silver nanocomposite filaments at different concentrations (0, 0.180%, 0.135%, 0.090%, 0.045% and 0.022% w/w) of silver nanoparticles in order to determine the minimum inhibitory concentration and minimum bactericidal concentration of silver incorporated in the PET matrix. The in vitro antibacterial activity was evaluated by the AATCC standard 100: 2012 method, against Staphylococcus aureus ATCC 6538, and Klebsiella pneumonia ATCC 4532. The filaments were tested after one and twenty-one months of preparation to evaluate the effect of time on the antimicrobial activity of the nanocomposites. Moreover, the antimicrobial activity was also evaluated after dyeing the filaments. The silver-free PET filaments have not demonstrated antimicrobial activity and cytotoxicity against human dermal fibroblasts. Nevertheless, excepted for the filament with 0.022% of silver nanoparticles, all PET-Silver nanocomposites reduced more than 99% the colony-forming units (CFU) of Staphylococcus aureus and Klebsiella pneumonia after one and twenty-one months of preparation. This suggests that the MIC of silver nanoparticles incorporated in the PET matrix is lower than 220 ppm (w/w) and the MBC is between 0.022 and 0.045% (w/w). However, after the dyeing process, no antimicrobial activity was observed for any PET-Silver nanocomposite filaments. This may be attributed to the release of silver from the PET matrix during the dyeing process or to the reaction/inactivation of the silver ions by the salts used in this chemical treatment.

• Periodical: Materials Science Forum (Volume 930)
• Pages: 212-217
• DOI: https://doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/MSF.930.212
• Online since: September 2018
• Authors: Marcos Antônio Guerra*, Jeferson Prado Swerts, Mei Abe Funcia, Maria Gabriela Nogueira Campos
• Keywords: Antimicrobial, Dyeing, Filaments, Nanocomposite, PET, Silver

References

[1] J. Hasan, R.J. Crawford, E.P. Ivanova: Trends in Biotechnology Vol. 31 (2013), p.295.

[2] L. Lin et al.: Materials Letter Vol. 65 (2011), p.1375.

[3] G.J. Tortora, B.R. Funke, C.L. Case: Microbiologia (Artmed Porto Alegre, 2012).

[4] S. Rajendran, S.C. Anand: Woven Textiles. (Elsevier first ed., 2014).

[5] N. Cioffi et al.: Nano-Antimicrobials: Progress and Prospects. (Springer, 2012).

[6] M.D. Teli, R.D. Kale: Advances in Applied Science Research Vol. 2 (2011), p.491.

[7] T.J. Berger et al.: Antimicrob Agents Chemother Vol. 9 (1976), p.357.

[8] J.P. Guggenbichler et al.: Infection Vol. 27 (1999), p. S16.

[9] J.F. Chen et al.: Biomaterials Vol. 25 (2004), p.723.

[10] I. Perelshtein, et al.: Nanotechnology Vol. 19 (2008), p.24.

[11] T. Oku et al.: Anti-bacterial and anti-fungal glaze composition for ceramic products. United States Patent 5,807,641 (1998).

[12] D. Panagiotis, K.S. Virender, R. Zboril: Advances in Colloid and Interface Science Vol. 166 (2011), p.119.

[13] AATCC 100: Assessment of Antibacterial Finishes on Textile Materials (2012).

[14] C. Wiegand et al.: Journal of Materials Science Materials in Medicine Vol. 26 (2015), p.18.

[15] G. Holla, R. Yeluri, A.K. Munshi: Contemporary Clinical Dentistry Vol. 3 (2012), p.288.

[16] M.A. Guerra at al.: Materials Science Forum Vol. 869 (2016), p.350.