Cargando…
Comparison of sonication with chemical biofilm dislodgement methods using chelating and reducing agents: Implications for the microbiological diagnosis of implant associated infection
The diagnosis of implant-associated infections is hampered due to microbial adherence and biofilm formation on the implant surface. Sonication of explanted devices was shown to improve the microbiological diagnosis by physical removal of biofilms. Recently, chemical agents have been investigated for...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Public Library of Science
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7141651/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32267888 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0231389 |
_version_ | 1783519235337617408 |
---|---|
author | Karbysheva, Svetlana Di Luca, Mariagrazia Butini, Maria Eugenia Winkler, Tobias Schütz, Michael Trampuz, Andrej |
author_facet | Karbysheva, Svetlana Di Luca, Mariagrazia Butini, Maria Eugenia Winkler, Tobias Schütz, Michael Trampuz, Andrej |
author_sort | Karbysheva, Svetlana |
collection | PubMed |
description | The diagnosis of implant-associated infections is hampered due to microbial adherence and biofilm formation on the implant surface. Sonication of explanted devices was shown to improve the microbiological diagnosis by physical removal of biofilms. Recently, chemical agents have been investigated for biofilm dislodgement such as the chelating agent ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA) and the reducing agent dithiothreitol (DTT). We compared the activity of chemical methods for biofilm dislodgement to sonication in an established in vitro model of artificial biofilm. Biofilm-producing laboratory strains of Staphylococcus epidermidis (ATCC 35984), S. aureus (ATCC 43300), E. coli (ATCC 25922) and Pseudomonas aeruginosa (ATCC 53278) were used. After 3 days of biofilm formation, porous glass beads were exposed to control (0.9% NaCl), sonication or chemical agents. Quantitative and qualitative biofilm analyses were performed by colony counting, isothermal microcalorimetry and scanning electron microscopy. Recovered colony counts after treatment with EDTA and DTT were similar to those after exposure to 0.9% NaCl for biofilms of S. epidermidis (6.3 and 6.1 vs. 6.0 log(10) CFU/mL, S. aureus (6.4 and 6.3 vs. 6.3 log(10) CFU/mL), E. coli (5.2 and 5.1 vs. 5.1 log(10) CFU/mL and P. aeruginosa (5.1 and 5.2 vs. 5.0 log(10) CFU/mL, respectively). In contrast, with sonication higher CFU counts were detected with all tested microorganisms (7.5, 7.3, 6.2 and 6.5 log(10) CFU/mL, respectively) (p <0.05). Concordant results were observed with isothermal microcalorimetry and scanning electron microscopy. In conclusion, sonication is superior to both tested chemical methods (EDTA and DTT) for dislodgement of S. epidermidis, S. aureus, E. coli and P. aeruginosa biofilms. Future studies may evaluate potential additive effect of chemical dislodgement to sonication. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7141651 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2020 |
publisher | Public Library of Science |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-71416512020-04-09 Comparison of sonication with chemical biofilm dislodgement methods using chelating and reducing agents: Implications for the microbiological diagnosis of implant associated infection Karbysheva, Svetlana Di Luca, Mariagrazia Butini, Maria Eugenia Winkler, Tobias Schütz, Michael Trampuz, Andrej PLoS One Research Article The diagnosis of implant-associated infections is hampered due to microbial adherence and biofilm formation on the implant surface. Sonication of explanted devices was shown to improve the microbiological diagnosis by physical removal of biofilms. Recently, chemical agents have been investigated for biofilm dislodgement such as the chelating agent ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA) and the reducing agent dithiothreitol (DTT). We compared the activity of chemical methods for biofilm dislodgement to sonication in an established in vitro model of artificial biofilm. Biofilm-producing laboratory strains of Staphylococcus epidermidis (ATCC 35984), S. aureus (ATCC 43300), E. coli (ATCC 25922) and Pseudomonas aeruginosa (ATCC 53278) were used. After 3 days of biofilm formation, porous glass beads were exposed to control (0.9% NaCl), sonication or chemical agents. Quantitative and qualitative biofilm analyses were performed by colony counting, isothermal microcalorimetry and scanning electron microscopy. Recovered colony counts after treatment with EDTA and DTT were similar to those after exposure to 0.9% NaCl for biofilms of S. epidermidis (6.3 and 6.1 vs. 6.0 log(10) CFU/mL, S. aureus (6.4 and 6.3 vs. 6.3 log(10) CFU/mL), E. coli (5.2 and 5.1 vs. 5.1 log(10) CFU/mL and P. aeruginosa (5.1 and 5.2 vs. 5.0 log(10) CFU/mL, respectively). In contrast, with sonication higher CFU counts were detected with all tested microorganisms (7.5, 7.3, 6.2 and 6.5 log(10) CFU/mL, respectively) (p <0.05). Concordant results were observed with isothermal microcalorimetry and scanning electron microscopy. In conclusion, sonication is superior to both tested chemical methods (EDTA and DTT) for dislodgement of S. epidermidis, S. aureus, E. coli and P. aeruginosa biofilms. Future studies may evaluate potential additive effect of chemical dislodgement to sonication. Public Library of Science 2020-04-08 /pmc/articles/PMC7141651/ /pubmed/32267888 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0231389 Text en © 2020 Karbysheva et al http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. |
spellingShingle | Research Article Karbysheva, Svetlana Di Luca, Mariagrazia Butini, Maria Eugenia Winkler, Tobias Schütz, Michael Trampuz, Andrej Comparison of sonication with chemical biofilm dislodgement methods using chelating and reducing agents: Implications for the microbiological diagnosis of implant associated infection |
title | Comparison of sonication with chemical biofilm dislodgement methods using chelating and reducing agents: Implications for the microbiological diagnosis of implant associated infection |
title_full | Comparison of sonication with chemical biofilm dislodgement methods using chelating and reducing agents: Implications for the microbiological diagnosis of implant associated infection |
title_fullStr | Comparison of sonication with chemical biofilm dislodgement methods using chelating and reducing agents: Implications for the microbiological diagnosis of implant associated infection |
title_full_unstemmed | Comparison of sonication with chemical biofilm dislodgement methods using chelating and reducing agents: Implications for the microbiological diagnosis of implant associated infection |
title_short | Comparison of sonication with chemical biofilm dislodgement methods using chelating and reducing agents: Implications for the microbiological diagnosis of implant associated infection |
title_sort | comparison of sonication with chemical biofilm dislodgement methods using chelating and reducing agents: implications for the microbiological diagnosis of implant associated infection |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7141651/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32267888 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0231389 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT karbyshevasvetlana comparisonofsonicationwithchemicalbiofilmdislodgementmethodsusingchelatingandreducingagentsimplicationsforthemicrobiologicaldiagnosisofimplantassociatedinfection AT dilucamariagrazia comparisonofsonicationwithchemicalbiofilmdislodgementmethodsusingchelatingandreducingagentsimplicationsforthemicrobiologicaldiagnosisofimplantassociatedinfection AT butinimariaeugenia comparisonofsonicationwithchemicalbiofilmdislodgementmethodsusingchelatingandreducingagentsimplicationsforthemicrobiologicaldiagnosisofimplantassociatedinfection AT winklertobias comparisonofsonicationwithchemicalbiofilmdislodgementmethodsusingchelatingandreducingagentsimplicationsforthemicrobiologicaldiagnosisofimplantassociatedinfection AT schutzmichael comparisonofsonicationwithchemicalbiofilmdislodgementmethodsusingchelatingandreducingagentsimplicationsforthemicrobiologicaldiagnosisofimplantassociatedinfection AT trampuzandrej comparisonofsonicationwithchemicalbiofilmdislodgementmethodsusingchelatingandreducingagentsimplicationsforthemicrobiologicaldiagnosisofimplantassociatedinfection |