| Literature DB >> 18201378 |
Sofia Costa-de-Oliveira1, Ricardo Araujo, Ana Silva-Dias, Cidália Pina-Vaz, Acácio Gonçalves Rodrigues.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The administration of non-antifungal drugs during patient hospitalization might be responsible for discrepancies between in vitro and in vivo susceptibility to antifungals. Propofol is often administered to intensive care units as a sedative. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of propofol lipidic infusion upon the growth and susceptibility profile of pathogenic fungi. Candida and Aspergillus were studied regarding the ability to grow and its susceptibility profile to antifungals in the presence of propofol infusion (Fresenius(R)) (1.25, 2.5 and 5 mg.ml-1) and its lipidic vehicle. The intensity of fluorescence after staining with FUN1, in the presence and absence of propofol infusion, was determined by flow cytometry. Radioactivity assays were also performed in order to quantify the input of [3H]- itraconazole into the fungal cell in the presence of propofol. Assays were repeated after addition of sodium azide, in order to block efflux pumps.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2008 PMID: 18201378 PMCID: PMC2258299 DOI: 10.1186/1471-2180-8-9
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Microbiol ISSN: 1471-2180 Impact factor: 3.605
Figure 1Representative example of Aspergillus fumigatus, after 24 hours of incubation: a. non-treated cells; b. cells treated with 5 mg.ml-1 of propofol infusion; c. cells treated with 5 mg.ml-1 of propofol infusion and washed thrice in sterilized water. (h hypha; p1 lipidic layer around hypha; p2 lipidic drops).
Minimal fungicidal concentration (MFC) values of Candidaand Aspergillus strains to AMB (amphotericin B), FLC (fluconazole), ITC (itraconazole), VRC (voriconazole) and PSC (posaconazole), determined by CLSI protocols, in the absence and presence of propofol infusion
| Strains (n) | ||||||||
| MFC values* range μg.ml-1 | ||||||||
| Antifungals | Propofol(mg.ml-1) | |||||||
| AMB | 0 | 0.25 | 0.25–1 | 0.06–0.125 | 0.25–0.5 | 0.25–0.5 | 0.5–1 | 0.06–0.25 |
| 1.25 | 0.5–1 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 1–4 | 1–>16 | 0.25–1 | |
| 2.5 | 0.5–2 | 1–2 | 2 | 2 | 2–4 | 1–>16 | 0.25–1 | |
| 5 | 2–4 | 2 | 2–8 | 4–8 | 4–16 | 4–>16 | 0.5–2 | |
| FLC | 0 | 8–16 | 4–8 | 8–16 | 16 | nd | nd | nd |
| 1.25 | 16–>64 | >64 | >64 | >64 | nd | nd | nd | |
| 2.5 | 16–>64 | >64 | >64 | >64 | nd | nd | nd | |
| 5 | 16–>64 | >64 | >64 | >64 | nd | nd | nd | |
| ITC | 0 | nd | nd | nd | nd | 0.5–16 | 0.125–0.25 | 0.125–16 |
| 1.25 | nd | nd | nd | nd | >16 | 2–>16 | >16 | |
| 2.5 | nd | nd | nd | nd | >16 | 8–>16 | >16 | |
| 5 | nd | nd | nd | nd | >16 | 16–>16 | >16 | |
| VRC | 0 | 0.06–0.25 | 0.25–0.5 | 0.5–1 | 4–8 | 0.25–4 | 0.25–2 | 0.06–8 |
| 1.25 | 0.25–>2 | >2 | >2 | >8 | 2–8 | 0.25–2 | 1–16 | |
| 2.5 | 0.5–>2 | >2 | >2 | >8 | 2–8 | 0.5–4 | 1–16 | |
| 5 | 1–>2 | >2 | >2 | >8 | 2–8 | 0.5–4 | 1–16 | |
| PSC | 0 | 0.06–0.125 | 0.03–0.125 | 0.06–0.125 | 1–2 | 0.03–0.25 | 0.03–0.06 | 0.06–1 |
| 1.25 | 1–2 | >2 | 2 | 2 | 1–4 | 0.25–2 | 0.125–8 | |
| 2.5 | >2 | >2 | 2 | >2 | 1–4 | 0.5–2 | 0.25–16 | |
| 5 | >2 | >2 | >2 | >2 | 1–4 | 0.5–4 | 0.25–>16 | |
nd not done
* The mean value for each strain was considered
Figure 2Flow cytometric histograms representing the emitted fluorescence after 90 minutes by: a. non-stained yeast cells (autofluorescence); b. cells treated with sodium azide and stained with FUN1; c. cells treated with sodium azide and 5 mg.ml-1 of propofol infusion and stained with FUN1 (strain of Candida albicans shown as a representative example).
Figure 3Effect of propofol up on [3H]-labelled itraconazole accumulation in antifungal susceptible strain C. albicans ATCC 90028. The accumulation of itraconazole was measured in the absence and presence of 5 mg.ml-1 of propofol and after a prior incubation with 0.1 mM sodium azide. Dispersion bars relates to standard deviation.