BACKGROUND: Infection of intravascular or implanted biomedical devices often involves biofilm-forming staphylococci that are recalcitrant to antimicrobial therapy. The present study investigated the activity of 6 antimicrobial agents against biofilm-forming and non-biofilm-forming strains of staphylococci adherent to the surface of selected biomedical devices. METHODS: Five clinical staphylococcal strains were selected for study in (1) antibiotic-lock model (ALM) and (b) vascular graft model (Dacron and expanded polytetrafluoroethylene [ePFTE]) devices. Test strains were inoculated for 30 minutes to stabilize microbial adherence and then exposed to antibiotic; the impact on bacterial adherence was assessed at 1, 2, 4, 7, and 10 days. RESULTS: Regarding ALM, daptomycin and rifampin were effective at eradicating staphylococcal adherence by day 4 (P<.01); linezolid and gentamicin by day 7 (P<.01); vancomycin by day 7; and ceftriaxone failed to eradicate staphylococcal adherence in 4 of 5 strains by day 10. Regarding ePTFE, daptomycin and linezolid eradicated staphylococcal adherence by day 2 (P<.01); rifampin by day 4 (P<.01); vancomycin and gentamicin by day 7 (P<.01); and ceftriaxone failed to eliminate staphylococcal adherence in 3 of 5 strains by day 10. Regarding Dacron, daptomycin and rifampin eradicated adherent strains by day 4 (P<.01); linezolid by day 7 (P<.01), and vancomycin, gentamicin, and ceftriaxone decreased staphylococcal adherence by 90%, 95%, and 78%, respectively, by day 10. COMMENTS: Daptomycin, rifampin, and linezolid demonstrated greater efficacy and speed in eradicating microbial adherence of staphylococcal isolates from selected devices compared with vancomycin, gentamicin, or ceftriaxone (P<.01). Further studies are warranted, however, to validate the clinical efficacy of daptomycin and linezolid in the treatment of biomedical device-associated infections.
BACKGROUND: Infection of intravascular or implanted biomedical devices often involves biofilm-forming staphylococci that are recalcitrant to antimicrobial therapy. The present study investigated the activity of 6 antimicrobial agents against biofilm-forming and non-biofilm-forming strains of staphylococci adherent to the surface of selected biomedical devices. METHODS: Five clinical staphylococcal strains were selected for study in (1) antibiotic-lock model (ALM) and (b) vascular graft model (Dacron and expanded polytetrafluoroethylene [ePFTE]) devices. Test strains were inoculated for 30 minutes to stabilize microbial adherence and then exposed to antibiotic; the impact on bacterial adherence was assessed at 1, 2, 4, 7, and 10 days. RESULTS: Regarding ALM, daptomycin and rifampin were effective at eradicating staphylococcal adherence by day 4 (P<.01); linezolid and gentamicin by day 7 (P<.01); vancomycin by day 7; and ceftriaxone failed to eradicate staphylococcal adherence in 4 of 5 strains by day 10. Regarding ePTFE, daptomycin and linezolid eradicated staphylococcal adherence by day 2 (P<.01); rifampin by day 4 (P<.01); vancomycin and gentamicin by day 7 (P<.01); and ceftriaxone failed to eliminate staphylococcal adherence in 3 of 5 strains by day 10. Regarding Dacron, daptomycin and rifampin eradicated adherent strains by day 4 (P<.01); linezolid by day 7 (P<.01), and vancomycin, gentamicin, and ceftriaxone decreased staphylococcal adherence by 90%, 95%, and 78%, respectively, by day 10. COMMENTS: Daptomycin, rifampin, and linezolid demonstrated greater efficacy and speed in eradicating microbial adherence of staphylococcal isolates from selected devices compared with vancomycin, gentamicin, or ceftriaxone (P<.01). Further studies are warranted, however, to validate the clinical efficacy of daptomycin and linezolid in the treatment of biomedical device-associated infections.
Authors: Jared A Niska; Jonathan H Shahbazian; Romela Irene Ramos; Jonathan R Pribaz; Fabrizio Billi; Kevin P Francis; Lloyd S Miller Journal: Antimicrob Agents Chemother Date: 2012-02-27 Impact factor: 5.191
Authors: A Obermeier; F D Matl; J Schwabe; A Zimmermann; K D Kühn; S Lakemeier; R von Eisenhart-Rothe; A Stemberger; R Burgkart Journal: J Mater Sci Mater Med Date: 2012-04-03 Impact factor: 3.896
Authors: Andrew D G Van Praagh; Tongchuan Li; Shuxin Zhang; Anu Arya; Liping Chen; Xi-Xian Zhang; Shellie Bertolami; Lawrence I Mortin Journal: Antimicrob Agents Chemother Date: 2011-06-27 Impact factor: 5.191
Authors: Evgeny A Idelevich; Dennis Knaack; Nyityasmono Tri Nugroho; Georg Peters; Theodosios Bisdas; Sonja Molinaro; Giovanni B Torsello; Karsten Becker; Monika Herten Journal: Med Microbiol Immunol Date: 2019-10-17 Impact factor: 3.402
Authors: Yue Qu; Andrew J Daley; Taghrid S Istivan; Suzanne M Garland; Margaret A Deighton Journal: Ann Clin Microbiol Antimicrob Date: 2010-05-27 Impact factor: 3.944
Authors: Steffen B Rosslenbroich; Michael J Raschke; Carolin Kreis; Nancy Tholema-Hans; Andreas Uekoetter; Rudolf Reichelt; Thomas F Fuchs Journal: ScientificWorldJournal Date: 2012-06-18
Authors: E Atahan; N Katrancioglu; Y Oztop; E Tuncer; H Ozer; S Manduz; E Engin; T D Yalta; O Berkan; K Dogan Journal: Cardiovasc J Afr Date: 2009 Mar-Apr Impact factor: 1.167
Authors: Yau Kei Stefan Leung; Bruno Ledergerber; Nadia Eberhard; Carlos A Mestres; Zoran Rancic; Alexander Zimmermann; Reinhard Zbinden; Silvio D Brugger; Annelies S Zinkernagel; Barbara Hasse Journal: JAC Antimicrob Resist Date: 2021-03-25