Literature DB >> 25313221

Antibiotic-loaded synthetic calcium sulfate beads for prevention of bacterial colonization and biofilm formation in periprosthetic infections.

R P Howlin1, M J Brayford2, J S Webb1, J J Cooper2, S S Aiken2, P Stoodley3.   

Abstract

Periprosthetic infection (PI) causes significant morbidity and mortality after fixation and joint arthroplasty and has been extensively linked to the formation of bacterial biofilms. Poly(methyl methacrylate) (PMMA), as a cement or as beads, is commonly used for antibiotic release to the site of infection but displays variable elution kinetics and also represents a potential nidus for infection, therefore requiring surgical removal once antibiotics have eluted. Absorbable cements have shown improved elution of a wider range of antibiotics and, crucially, complete biodegradation, but limited data exist as to their antimicrobial and antibiofilm efficacy. Synthetic calcium sulfate beads loaded with tobramycin, vancomycin, or vancomycin-tobramycin dual treatment (in a 1:0.24 [wt/wt] ratio) were assessed for their abilities to eradicate planktonic methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) and Staphylococcus epidermidis relative to that of PMMA beads. The ability of the calcium sulfate beads to prevent biofilm formation over multiple days and to eradicate preformed biofilms was studied using a combination of viable cell counts, confocal microscopy, and scanning electron microscopy of the bead surface. Biofilm bacteria displayed a greater tolerance to the antibiotics than their planktonic counterparts. Antibiotic-loaded beads were able to kill planktonic cultures of 10(6) CFU/ml, prevent bacterial colonization, and significantly reduce biofilm formation over multiple days. However, established biofilms were harder to eradicate. These data further demonstrate the difficulty in clearing established biofilms; therefore, early preventive measures are key to reducing the risk of PI. Synthetic calcium sulfate loaded with antibiotics has the potential to reduce or eliminate biofilm formation on adjacent periprosthetic tissue and prosthesis material and, thus, to reduce the rates of periprosthetic infection.
Copyright © 2015, American Society for Microbiology. All Rights Reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25313221      PMCID: PMC4291338          DOI: 10.1128/AAC.03676-14

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother        ISSN: 0066-4804            Impact factor:   5.191


  42 in total

Review 1.  The immune system vs. Pseudomonas aeruginosa biofilms.

Authors:  Peter Østrup Jensen; Michael Givskov; Thomas Bjarnsholt; Claus Moser
Journal:  FEMS Immunol Med Microbiol       Date:  2010-05-28

Review 2.  Biofilm theory can guide the treatment of device-related orthopaedic infections.

Authors:  J William Costerton
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2005-08       Impact factor: 4.176

3.  Potential use of copper surfaces to reduce survival of epidemic meticillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus in the healthcare environment.

Authors:  J O Noyce; H Michels; C W Keevil
Journal:  J Hosp Infect       Date:  2006-05-02       Impact factor: 3.926

4.  Direct demonstration of viable Staphylococcus aureus biofilms in an infected total joint arthroplasty. A case report.

Authors:  Paul Stoodley; Laura Nistico; Sandra Johnson; Leslie-Ann Lasko; Mark Baratz; Vikram Gahlot; Garth D Ehrlich; Sandeep Kathju
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  2008-08       Impact factor: 5.284

5.  Managing lower-extremity osteomyelitis locally with surgical debridement and synthetic calcium sulfate antibiotic tablets.

Authors:  Christopher Gauland
Journal:  Adv Skin Wound Care       Date:  2011-11       Impact factor: 2.347

6.  The Microbiological Profiles of Infected Prosthetic Implants with an Emphasis on the Organisms which Form Biofilms.

Authors:  Anisha Fernandes; Meena Dias
Journal:  J Clin Diagn Res       Date:  2013-02-01

7.  In vitro and in vivo efficacies of teicoplanin-loaded calcium sulfate for treatment of chronic methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus osteomyelitis.

Authors:  Wei-Tao Jia; Shi-Hua Luo; Chang-Qing Zhang; Jian-Qiang Wang
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  2009-11-16       Impact factor: 5.191

Review 8.  The use of antimicrobial-impregnated PMMA to manage periprosthetic infections: controversial issues and the latest developments.

Authors:  H L Tan; W T Lin; T T Tang
Journal:  Int J Artif Organs       Date:  2012-10       Impact factor: 1.595

9.  Decline of EMRSA-16 amongst methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus causing bacteraemias in the UK between 2001 and 2007.

Authors:  Matthew J Ellington; Russell Hope; David M Livermore; Angela M Kearns; Katherine Henderson; Barry D Cookson; Andrew Pearson; Alan P Johnson
Journal:  J Antimicrob Chemother       Date:  2009-12-24       Impact factor: 5.790

10.  Drug-eluting cements for hard tissue repair: a comparative study using vancomycin and RNPA1000 to inhibit growth of Staphylococcus aureus.

Authors:  Tess M Eidem; Aisling Coughlan; Mark R Towler; Paul M Dunman; Anthony William Wren
Journal:  J Biomater Appl       Date:  2013-09-12       Impact factor: 2.712

View more
  66 in total

1.  CORR Insights(®): Biofilm Antimicrobial Susceptibility Increases With Antimicrobial Exposure Time.

Authors:  Paul Stoodley
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2016-02-09       Impact factor: 4.176

2.  Leukocidins and the Nuclease Nuc Prevent Neutrophil-Mediated Killing of Staphylococcus aureus Biofilms.

Authors:  Mohini Bhattacharya; Evelien T M Berends; Xuhui Zheng; Preston J Hill; Rita Chan; Victor J Torres; Daniel J Wozniak
Journal:  Infect Immun       Date:  2020-09-18       Impact factor: 3.441

3.  CORR Insights®: Is Implant Coating With Tyrosol- and Antibiotic-loaded Hydrogel Effective in Reducing Cutibacterium (Propionibacterium) acnes Biofilm Formation? A Preliminary In Vitro Study.

Authors:  Paul Stoodley
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2019-07       Impact factor: 4.176

Review 4.  Targeting microbial biofilms: current and prospective therapeutic strategies.

Authors:  Hyun Koo; Raymond N Allan; Robert P Howlin; Paul Stoodley; Luanne Hall-Stoodley
Journal:  Nat Rev Microbiol       Date:  2017-09-25       Impact factor: 60.633

5.  Rifamycin Derivatives Are Effective Against Staphylococcal Biofilms In Vitro and Elutable From PMMA.

Authors:  Carlos J Sanchez; Stefanie M Shiels; David J Tennent; Sharanda K Hardy; Clinton K Murray; Joseph C Wenke
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2015-09       Impact factor: 4.176

6.  Novel Aminoglycoside-Tolerant Phoenix Colony Variants of Pseudomonas aeruginosa.

Authors:  Devin Sindeldecker; Kelly Moore; Anthony Li; Daniel J Wozniak; Matthew Anderson; Devendra H Dusane; Paul Stoodley
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  2020-08-20       Impact factor: 5.191

Review 7.  Static antibiotic spacers augmented by calcium sulphate impregnated beads in revision TKA: Surgical technique and review of literature.

Authors:  Salvatore Risitano; Luigi Sabatini; Francesco Atzori; Alessandro Massè; Pier Francesco Indelli
Journal:  J Orthop       Date:  2018-02-21

8.  In Vivo Gentamicin Susceptibility Test for Prevention of Bacterial Biofilms in Bone Tissue and on Implants.

Authors:  Louise Kruse Jensen; Thomas Bjarnsholt; Kasper N Kragh; Bent Aalbæk; Nicole Lind Henriksen; Sophie Amalie Blirup; Karen Pankoke; Andreas Petersen; Henrik Elvang Jensen
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  2019-01-29       Impact factor: 5.191

Review 9.  Microbial resistance related to antibiotic-loaded bone cement: a historical review.

Authors:  Lucy C Walker; Paul Baker; Richard Holleyman; David Deehan
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2016-09-12       Impact factor: 4.342

10.  Antimicrobial Formulations of Absorbable Bone Substitute Materials as Drug Carriers Based on Calcium Sulfate.

Authors:  D Pförringer; A Obermeier; M Kiokekli; H Büchner; S Vogt; A Stemberger; R Burgkart; M Lucke
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  2016-06-20       Impact factor: 5.191

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.