PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to analyze the effect of azithromycin (AZM) 1% ophthalmic solution in DuraSite® (AzaSite®) on biofilm formation by Staphylococcus aureus and coagulase-negative staphylococci in vitro. METHODS: Susceptible and resistant clinical strains (n = 8) of S. aureus and coagulase-negative staphylococci were challenged with serial dilutions of AzaSite® and its components: AZM, benzalkonium chloride (BAK), and the DuraSite drug delivery vehicle. After 20 h of incubation, bacterial growth was quantified using a spectrophotometer (A = 600 nm). Plates were stained with crystal violet and biofilm formation was quantified spectrophotometrically at A = 590 nm. RESULTS: AzaSite® and AZM inhibited bacterial growth (P < 0.05) and biofilm formation (P < 0.05) in AZM-susceptible strains at all studied dilutions. AZM-resistant strains treated with AzaSite® exhibited a significant reduction in biofilm formation (P < 0.05) at subinhibitory concentrations (1.25%-5%). AZM had no effect on bacterial growth in resistant strains but conferred a small reduction in biofilm formation at concentrations from 1.25 to 10 mg/mL in most strains. DuraSite® inhibited biofilm formation at concentrations between 10% and 2.5% in all studied strains (P < 0.05), without affecting bacterial growth. BAK inhibited bacterial growth and biofilm formation in all strains between concentrations of 0.042 and 0.375 mg/mL (P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: AzaSite®, AZM, or BAK prevented biofilm formation by inhibiting growth of AZM-susceptible strains. AzaSite®, AZM, and DuraSite® also reduced biofilm formation at subinhibitory concentrations for growth. Our data indicate that AZM has a moderate inhibitory effect on biofilm formation, whereas DuraSite® appears to play a greater role in the inhibition of staphylococcal biofilm formation by AzaSite®.
PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to analyze the effect of azithromycin (AZM) 1% ophthalmic solution in DuraSite® (AzaSite®) on biofilm formation by Staphylococcus aureus and coagulase-negative staphylococci in vitro. METHODS: Susceptible and resistant clinical strains (n = 8) of S. aureus and coagulase-negative staphylococci were challenged with serial dilutions of AzaSite® and its components: AZM, benzalkonium chloride (BAK), and the DuraSite drug delivery vehicle. After 20 h of incubation, bacterial growth was quantified using a spectrophotometer (A = 600 nm). Plates were stained with crystal violet and biofilm formation was quantified spectrophotometrically at A = 590 nm. RESULTS:AzaSite® and AZM inhibited bacterial growth (P < 0.05) and biofilm formation (P < 0.05) in AZM-susceptible strains at all studied dilutions. AZM-resistant strains treated with AzaSite® exhibited a significant reduction in biofilm formation (P < 0.05) at subinhibitory concentrations (1.25%-5%). AZM had no effect on bacterial growth in resistant strains but conferred a small reduction in biofilm formation at concentrations from 1.25 to 10 mg/mL in most strains. DuraSite® inhibited biofilm formation at concentrations between 10% and 2.5% in all studied strains (P < 0.05), without affecting bacterial growth. BAK inhibited bacterial growth and biofilm formation in all strains between concentrations of 0.042 and 0.375 mg/mL (P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS:AzaSite®, AZM, or BAK prevented biofilm formation by inhibiting growth of AZM-susceptible strains. AzaSite®, AZM, and DuraSite® also reduced biofilm formation at subinhibitory concentrations for growth. Our data indicate that AZM has a moderate inhibitory effect on biofilm formation, whereas DuraSite® appears to play a greater role in the inhibition of staphylococcal biofilm formation by AzaSite®.
Authors: Timothy D Starner; Joshua D Shrout; Matthew R Parsek; Peter C Appelbaum; GunHee Kim Journal: Antimicrob Agents Chemother Date: 2007-10-22 Impact factor: 5.191
Authors: Eric G Romanowski; Nicholas A Stella; Kathleen A Yates; Kimberly M Brothers; Regis P Kowalski; Robert M Q Shanks Journal: Eye Contact Lens Date: 2018-11 Impact factor: 2.018
Authors: Robert D Wojtyczka; Andrzej Zięba; Arkadiusz Dziedzic; Małgorzata Kępa; Danuta Idzik Journal: Biomed Res Int Date: 2015-05-03 Impact factor: 3.411
Authors: S Chusri; K Sompetch; S Mukdee; S Jansrisewangwong; T Srichai; K Maneenoon; S Limsuwan; S P Voravuthikunchai Journal: Evid Based Complement Alternat Med Date: 2012-08-07 Impact factor: 2.629