Literature DB >> 21732324

Hydrodynamic deformation and removal of Staphylococcus epidermidis biofilms treated with urea, chlorhexidine, iron chloride, or DispersinB.

Eric R Brindle1, David A Miller, Philip S Stewart.   

Abstract

The force-deflection and removal characteristics of bacterial biofilm were measured by two different techniques before and after chemical, or enzymatic, treatment. The first technique involved time lapse imaging of a biofilm grown in a capillary flow cell and subjected to a brief shear stress challenge imparted through increased fluid flow. Biofilm removal was determined by calculating the reduction in biofilm area from quantitative analysis of transmission images. The second technique was based on micro-indentation using an atomic force microscope. In both cases, biofilms formed by Staphylococcus epidermidis were exposed to buffer (untreated control), urea, chlorhexidine, iron chloride, or DispersinB. In control experiments, the biofilm exhibited force-deflection responses that were similar before and after the same treatment. The biofilm structure was stable during the post-treatment shear challenge (1% loss). Biofilms treated with chlorhexidine became less deformable after treatment and no increase in biomass removal was seen during the post-treatment shear challenge (2% loss). In contrast, biofilms treated with urea or DispersinB became more deformable and exhibited significant biofilm loss during the post-treatment flow challenge (71% and 40%, respectively). During the treatment soak phase, biofilms exposed to urea swelled. Biofilms exposed to iron chloride showed little difference from the control other than slight contraction during the treatment soak. These observations suggest the following interpretations: (1) chemical or enzymatic treatments, including those that are not frankly antimicrobial, can alter the cohesion of bacterial biofilm; (2) biocidal treatments (e.g., chlorhexidine) do not necessarily weaken the biofilm; and (3) biofilm removal following treatment with agents that make the biofilm more deformable (e.g., urea, DispersinB) depend on interaction between the moving fluid and the biofilm structure. Measurements such as those reported here open the door to development of new technologies for controlling detrimental biofilms by targeting biofilm cohesion rather than killing microorganisms.
Copyright © 2011 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21732324     DOI: 10.1002/bit.23245

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Biotechnol Bioeng        ISSN: 0006-3592            Impact factor:   4.530


  20 in total

1.  Antimicrobial penetration in a dual-species oral biofilm after noncontact brushing: an in vitro study.

Authors:  Y He; B W Peterson; Y Ren; H C van der Mei; H J Busscher
Journal:  Clin Oral Investig       Date:  2013-09-10       Impact factor: 3.573

2.  Molar mass, entanglement, and associations of the biofilm polysaccharide of Staphylococcus epidermidis.

Authors:  Mahesh Ganesan; Elizabeth J Stewart; Jacob Szafranski; Ashley E Satorius; John G Younger; Michael J Solomon
Journal:  Biomacromolecules       Date:  2013-04-17       Impact factor: 6.988

Review 3.  Hurdle technology using encapsulated enzymes and essential oils to fight bacterial biofilms.

Authors:  Samah Mechmechani; Simon Khelissa; Adem Gharsallaoui; Khaled El Omari; Monzer Hamze; Nour-Eddine Chihib
Journal:  Appl Microbiol Biotechnol       Date:  2022-03-21       Impact factor: 4.813

Review 4.  Exploiting social evolution in biofilms.

Authors:  Kerry E Boyle; Silja Heilmann; Dave van Ditmarsch; Joao B Xavier
Journal:  Curr Opin Microbiol       Date:  2013-01-26       Impact factor: 7.934

Review 5.  Biophysics of biofilm infection.

Authors:  Philip S Stewart
Journal:  Pathog Dis       Date:  2014-01-16       Impact factor: 3.166

Review 6.  Clinical Evidence of Current Irrigation Practices and the Use of Oral Antibiotics to Prevent and Treat Periprosthetic Joint Infection.

Authors:  Jason Zlotnicki; Alexandra Gabrielli; Kenneth L Urish; Kimberly M Brothers
Journal:  Orthop Clin North Am       Date:  2021-02-10       Impact factor: 2.472

7.  A novel microfluidic wound model for testing antimicrobial agents against Staphylococcus pseudintermedius biofilms.

Authors:  Jacob Terry; Suresh Neethirajan
Journal:  J Nanobiotechnology       Date:  2014-01-13       Impact factor: 10.435

8.  Antifouling activity of enzyme-functionalized silica nanobeads.

Authors:  Michele Zanoni; Olivier Habimana; Jessica Amadio; Eoin Casey
Journal:  Biotechnol Bioeng       Date:  2015-09-28       Impact factor: 4.530

9.  Development of a Laboratory Model of a Phototroph-Heterotroph Mixed-Species Biofilm at the Stone/Air Interface.

Authors:  Federica Villa; Betsey Pitts; Ellen Lauchnor; Francesca Cappitelli; Philip S Stewart
Journal:  Front Microbiol       Date:  2015-11-17       Impact factor: 5.640

10.  Effects of human serum and apo-Transferrin on Staphylococcus epidermidis RP62A biofilm formation.

Authors:  Pengfei She; Lihua Chen; Yong Qi; Huan Xu; Yuan Liu; Yangxia Wang; Zhen Luo; Yong Wu
Journal:  Microbiologyopen       Date:  2016-05-16       Impact factor: 3.139

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.