new robbins dispositive to evaluate antimicrobials activity against bacterial biofilms on central venous catheters

##plugins.themes.academic_pro.article.sidebar##

Published Jul 23, 2015
Download
pdf
Vol. 93 No. 3 (2015): Issue Mar 2015

##plugins.themes.academic_pro.article.main##

Mekni Mohamed Amine
Achour Wafa
Ben Hassen Assia

Abstract

Background: Layouts of biomedical devices were tightly related with the emergence of Staphylococcus epidermidis as a major cause of nosocomial infections because of its ability to form biofilm on the biomaterial surfaces. This fact led researchers to develop in-vitro models to simulate what is really happening during biofilm formation process in order to have a better understanding of this phenomena and then to control it and to resolve the associated problems.
The aim of this paper was to develop a homemade dynamic device based on instruments used in clinical practice, easy to mount, with low coast and with no sophisticated features.
Methods : used to evaluate this dispositive were hydrodynamic calculation and enumeration of bacterial cells on petri dishes and with real time polymerase chain reaction during simulation of Staphylococcus epidermidis biofilm eradication with daptomycin. Results: With hydrodynamic calculation, Reynolds number was estimated to be 26.62 corresponding to a perfect laminar flux giving suitable dynamic growth environment for such experiment. Data recovered from cell enumeration with the two methods showed that bacterial colonization of the tested catheter segment was significantly reduced after 24 and 48h of treatment with daptomycin (P<0.01) reflecting a considerable reliability of this device.
Conclusion: the simple dispositive developed in this work has shown acceptable hydrodynamic proprieties and good reliability making research on biofilm easy to reach.

Keywords:

Dispositive; Antimicrobials; Biofilm; Catheters.

##plugins.themes.academic_pro.article.details##

References

  1. Honraet K, Nelis, HJ, Use of the modified robbins device and fluorescent staining to screen plant extracts for the inhibition of S. mutans biofilm formation. J Microbiol Methods 2006; 64:217
  2. Iwase T, Hoshina S, Seki K, Shinji H, Masuda S, Mizunoe Y, Rapid identification and specific quantification of Staphylococcus epidermidis by 5′ nuclease real-time polymerase chain reaction with a minor groove binder probe. Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis 2008; 60:217
  3. Hentzer M, Wu H, Andersen JB, Riedel K, Rasmussen TB, Bagge N, et al. Attenuation of Pseudomonas aeruginosa virulence by quorum sensing inhibitors. Embo J 2003; 22:3803
  4. Goeres DM, Loetterle LR, Hamilton MA, Murga R., Kirby DW, Donlan RM. Statistical assessment of a laboratory method for growing biofilms. Microbiology 2005; 151: 757
  5. Bird RB, Stewart WE, Lightfoot EN. Transport Phenomena. (Revised Second Edition ed.) USA:Wiley.2006
  6. Webb JS, Givskov M, Kjelleberg S. Bacterial biofilms: prokaryotic adventures in multicellularity. Curr Opin Microbiol 2003; 6: 578
  7. Schwartz K, Stephenson R, Hernandez M, Jambang N, Boles BR. The Use of Drip Flow and Rotating Disk Reactors for Staphylococcus aureus Biofilm Analysis. J Vis Exp 2010; e2470.
  8. Costerton JW, Lewandowski Z, Caldwell DE, Korber DR, Lappin-Scott HM. Microbial Biofilms. Annu Rev Microbiol 1995; 49: 711
  9. Christensen GD, Simpson WA, Bisno AL, Beachey EH. Adherence of slime-producing strains of Staphylococcus epidermidis to smooth surfaces. Infect Immun 1982; 37: 318-326
  10. Terada A, Yuasa A, Kushimoto T, Tsuneda S, Katakai A, Tamada M. Bacterial adhesion to and viability on positively charged polymer surfaces. Microbiology 2006; 152: 3575
  11. Goeres DM, Hamilton MA, Beck NA, Buckingham-Meyer K, Hilyard JD, Loetterle LR, et al. A method for growing a biofilm under low shear at the air-liquid interface using the drip flow biofilm reactor. Nat Protocols 2009; 4: 783
  12. Mccoy WF, Bryers JD, Robbins J, Costerton JW. Observations of fouling biofilm formation. Can J Microbiol 1981; 27: 910.
  13. Kobayashi H, Oethinger M, Tuohy M, Procop G, Bauer T. Improved Detection of Biofilm-formative Bacteria by Vortexing and Sonication: A Pilot Study. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2009; 467: 1360
  14. Hajdu S, Lassnigg A, Graninger W, Hirschl AM, Presterl E. Effects of vancomycin, daptomycin, fosfomycin, tigecycline, and ceftriaxone on Staphylococcus epidermidis biofilms. J Orthop Res 2009; 27:1361.
  15. Kim J, Park HD, Chung S. Microfluidic Approaches to Bacterial Biofilm Formation. Molecules. 2012; 17:9818
  16. Habash M, Reid G. Microbial biofilms: their development and significance for medical device-related infections. J Clin Pharmacol 1999 39:887.
  17. Stewart PS, Davison WM, Steenbergen JN. Daptomycin Rapidly Penetrates a Staphylococcus epidermidis Biofilm. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2009; 53:3505
  18. Terada A, Yuasa A, Kushimoto T, Tsuneda S, Katakai A, Tamada M. Bacterial adhesion to and viability on positively charged polymer surfaces. Microbiology 2006; 152: 3575.
  19. García I, Conejo MDC, Ojeda A, Rodríguez-Baño J, Pascual A. A dynamic in vitro model for evaluating antimicrobial activity against bacterial biofilms using a new device and clinical-used catheters. J Microbiol Methods 2010; 83:307.
  20. Buckingham-Meyer K, Goeres DM, Hamilton MA. Comparative evaluation of biofilm disinfectant efficacy tests. J Microbiol Methods 2007; 70:236.