Prevention and control of biofilm-growing microorganisms are serious problems in public health due to increasing resistances of some pathogens against antimicrobial drugs and the potential of these microorganisms to cause severe infections in patients. Therefore, alternative approaches that are capable of killing pathogens are needed to supplement standard treatment modalities. One alternative is the photodynamic inactivation of bacteria (PIB). The lethal effect of PIB is based on the principle that visible light activates a photosensitizer, leading to the formation of reactive oxygen species, e.g., singlet oxygen, which induces phototoxicity immediately during illumination. SAPYR is a new generation of photosensitizers. Based on a 7-perinaphthenone structure, it shows a singlet oxygen quantum yield ΦΔ of 99% and is water soluble and photostable. Moreover, it contains a positive charge for good adherence to cell walls of pathogens. In this study, the PIB properties of SAPYR were investigated against monospecies and polyspecies biofilms formed in vitro by oral key pathogens. SAPYR showed a dual mechanism of action against biofilms: (I) it disrupts the structure of the biofilm even without illumination; (II) when irradiated, it inactivates bacteria in a polymicrobial biofilm after one single treatment with an efficacy of ≥ 99.99%. These results encourage further investigation on the potential of PIB using SAPYR for the treatment of localized infectious diseases.

The term bioactivity is being increasingly used in medicine and dentistry. Due to its positive connotation, it is frequently utilised for advertising dental restorative materials. However, there is confusion about what the term means, and concerns have been raised about its potential overuse. Therefore, FDI decided to publish a Policy Statement about the bioactivity of dental restorative materials to clarify the term and provide some caveats for its use in advertising. Background information for this Policy Statement was taken from the current literature, mainly from the PubMed database and the internet. Bioactive restorative materials should have beneficial/desired effects. These effects should be local, intended, and nontoxic and should not interfere with a material's principal purpose, namely dental tissue replacement. Three mechanisms for the bioactivity of such materials have been identified: purely biological, mixed biological/chemical, or strictly chemical. Therefore, when the term bioactivity is used in an advertisement or in a description of a dental restorative material, scientific evidence (in vitro or in situ, and preferably in clinical studies) should be provided describing the mechanism of action, the duration of the effect (especially for materials releasing antibacterial substances), and the lack of significant adverse biological side effects (including the development and spread of antimicrobial resistance). Finally, it should be documented that the prime purpose, for instance, to be used to rebuild the form and function of lost tooth substance or lost teeth, is not impaired, as demonstrated by data from in vitro and clinical studies. The use of the term bioactive dental restorative material in material advertisement/information should be restricted to materials that fulfil all the requirements as described in the FDI Policy Statement.