Literature DB >> 25741986

Standard versus biofilm antimicrobial susceptibility testing to guide antibiotic therapy in cystic fibrosis.

Valerie Waters1, Felix Ratjen.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The antibiotics used to treat pulmonary infections in people with cystic fibrosis are typically chosen based on the results of antimicrobial susceptibility testing performed on bacteria traditionally grown in a planktonic mode (grown in a liquid). However, there is considerable evidence to suggest that Pseudomonas aeruginosa actually grows in a biofilm (or slime layer) in the airways of people with cystic fibrosis with chronic pulmonary infections. Therefore, choosing antibiotics based on biofilm rather than conventional antimicrobial susceptibility testing could potentially improve response to treatment of Pseudomonas aeruginosa in people with cystic fibrosis. This is an update of a previously published Cochrane Review.
OBJECTIVES: To compare biofilm antimicrobial susceptibility testing-driven therapy to conventional antimicrobial susceptibility testing-driven therapy in the treatment of Pseudomonas aeruginosa infection in people with cystic fibrosis. SEARCH
METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Cystic Fibrosis Trials Register, compiled from electronic database searches and handsearching of journals and conference abstract books. We also searched a registry of ongoing trials and the reference lists of relevant articles and reviews.Most recent search: 19 November 2014. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomized controlled trials of antibiotic therapy based on biofilm antimicrobial susceptibility testing compared to antibiotic therapy based on conventional antimicrobial susceptibility testing in the treatment of Pseudomonas aeruginosa pulmonary infection in people with cystic fibrosis. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Both authors independently selected trials, assessed their risk of bias and extracted data from eligible trials. Additionally, the review authors contacted the trial investigators to obtain further information. MAIN
RESULTS: The searches identified two multicentre, randomized, double-blind controlled clinical trials eligible for inclusion in the review with a total of 78 participants; one trial was done in people who were clinically stable, the other in people experiencing pulmonary exacerbations. These trials prospectively assessed whether the use of biofilm antimicrobial susceptibility testing improved microbiological and clinical outcomes in participants with cystic fibrosis who were infected with Pseudomonas aeruginosa. The primary outcome was the change in sputum Pseudomonas aeruginosa density from the beginning to the end of antibiotic therapy.Although the intervention was shown to be safe, the data from these two trials did not provide evidence that biofilm susceptibility testing was superior to conventional susceptibility testing either in terms of microbiological or lung function outcomes. One of the trials also measured risk and time to subsequent exacerbation as well as quality of life measures and did not demonstrate any difference between groups in these outcomes. Both trials had an overall low risk of bias. AUTHORS'
CONCLUSIONS: The current evidence is insufficient to recommend choosing antibiotics based on biofilm antimicrobial susceptibility testing rather than conventional antimicrobial susceptibility testing in the treatment of Pseudomonas aeruginosa pulmonary infections in people with cystic fibrosis. Biofilm antimicrobial susceptibility testing may be more appropriate in the development of newer, more effective formulations of drugs which can then be tested in clinical trials.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2015        PMID: 25741986     DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD009528.pub3

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev        ISSN: 1361-6137


  9 in total

1.  Standard versus biofilm antimicrobial susceptibility testing to guide antibiotic therapy in cystic fibrosis.

Authors:  Sherie Smith; Valerie Waters; Nikki Jahnke; Felix Ratjen
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2020-06-10

Review 2.  How can the cystic fibrosis respiratory microbiome influence our clinical decision-making?

Authors:  Geraint B Rogers; Kenneth D Bruce; Lucas R Hoffman
Journal:  Curr Opin Pulm Med       Date:  2017-11       Impact factor: 3.155

Review 3.  Standard versus biofilm antimicrobial susceptibility testing to guide antibiotic therapy in cystic fibrosis.

Authors:  Valerie Waters; Felix Ratjen
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2017-10-05

4.  Differences in Gene Expression Profiles between Early and Late Isolates in Monospecies Achromobacter Biofilm.

Authors:  Signe M Nielsen; Rikke L Meyer; Niels Nørskov-Lauritsen
Journal:  Pathogens       Date:  2017-05-19

5.  New Antibacterial Paper Made of Silver Phosphate Cellulose Fibers: A Preliminary Study on the Elimination of Staphylococcus aureus Involved in Diabetic Foot Ulceration.

Authors:  Virginie Blanchette; Dan Belosinschi; Thanh Tung Lai; Lyne Cloutier; Simon Barnabé
Journal:  Biomed Res Int       Date:  2020-01-09       Impact factor: 3.411

6.  Kinetic of Adhesion of S. epidermidis with Different EPS Production on Ti6Al4V Surfaces.

Authors:  Miguel Ángel Pacha-Olivenza; Abraham Rodríguez-Cano; M Luisa González-Martín; Amparo M Gallardo-Moreno
Journal:  Biomed Res Int       Date:  2019-11-26       Impact factor: 3.411

7.  Pseudomonas aeruginosa Is More Tolerant Under Biofilm Than Under Planktonic Growth Conditions: A Multi-Isolate Survey.

Authors:  Janne G Thöming; Susanne Häussler
Journal:  Front Cell Infect Microbiol       Date:  2022-02-28       Impact factor: 5.293

Review 8.  Sub-Optimal Treatment of Bacterial Biofilms.

Authors:  Tianyan Song; Marylise Duperthuy; Sun Nyunt Wai
Journal:  Antibiotics (Basel)       Date:  2016-06-22

9.  Towards individualized diagnostics of biofilm-associated infections: a case study.

Authors:  Mathias Müsken; Kathi Klimmek; Annette Sauer-Heilborn; Monique Donnert; Ludwig Sedlacek; Sebastian Suerbaum; Susanne Häussler
Journal:  NPJ Biofilms Microbiomes       Date:  2017-09-28       Impact factor: 7.290

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.