Literature DB >> 26185072

Antimicrobial Tolerance in Biofilms.

Philip S Stewart1.   

Abstract

The tolerance of microorganisms in biofilms to antimicrobial agents is examined through a meta-analysis of literature data. A numerical tolerance factor comparing the rates of killing in the planktonic and biofilm states is defined to provide a quantitative basis for the analysis. Tolerance factors for biocides and antibiotics range over three orders of magnitude. This variation is not explained by taking into account the molecular weight of the agent, the chemistry of the agent, the substratum material, or the speciation of the microorganisms. Tolerance factors do depend on the areal cell density of the biofilm at the time of treatment and on the age of the biofilm as grown in a particular experimental system. This suggests that there is something that happens during biofilm maturation, either physical or physiological, that is essential for full biofilm tolerance. Experimental measurements of antimicrobial penetration times in biofilms range over orders of magnitude, with slower penetration (>12 min) observed for reactive oxidants and cationic molecules. These agents are retarded through the interaction of reaction, sorption, and diffusion. The specific physiological status of microbial cells in a biofilm contributes to antimicrobial tolerance. A conceptual framework for categorizing physiological cell states is discussed in the context of antimicrobial susceptibility. It is likely that biofilms harbor cells in multiple states simultaneously (e.g., growing, stress-adapted, dormant, inactive) and that this physiological heterogeneity is an important factor in the tolerance of the biofilm state.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26185072      PMCID: PMC4507308          DOI: 10.1128/microbiolspec.MB-0010-2014

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Microbiol Spectr        ISSN: 2165-0497


  79 in total

1.  Measurement of chlorine dioxide penetration in dairy process pipe biofilms during disinfection.

Authors:  Am Jang; Jeffrey Szabo; Ahmed A Hosni; Michael Coughlin; Paul L Bishop
Journal:  Appl Microbiol Biotechnol       Date:  2006-01-06       Impact factor: 4.813

2.  Free chlorine and monochloramine application to nitrifying biofilm: comparison of biofilm penetration, activity, and viability.

Authors:  Woo Hyoung Lee; David G Wahman; Paul L Bishop; Jonathan G Pressman
Journal:  Environ Sci Technol       Date:  2011-01-12       Impact factor: 9.028

3.  Involvement of toxin-antitoxin modules in Burkholderia cenocepacia biofilm persistence.

Authors:  Heleen Van Acker; Andrea Sass; Inne Dhondt; Hans J Nelis; Tom Coenye
Journal:  Pathog Dis       Date:  2014-04-28       Impact factor: 3.166

4.  Effect of triclosan on Salmonella typhimurium at different growth stages and in biofilms.

Authors:  Mina Tabak; Keren Scher; Efrat Hartog; Ute Romling; Karl R Matthews; Michael L Chikindas; Sima Yaron
Journal:  FEMS Microbiol Lett       Date:  2006-12-06       Impact factor: 2.742

5.  Role of rifampin against Propionibacterium acnes biofilm in vitro and in an experimental foreign-body infection model.

Authors:  Ulrika Furustrand Tafin; Stéphane Corvec; Bertrand Betrisey; Werner Zimmerli; Andrej Trampuz
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  2012-01-17       Impact factor: 5.191

6.  In vitro activity of ciprofloxacin, moxifloxacin, vancomycin and erythromycin against planktonic and biofilm forms of Corynebacterium urealyticum.

Authors:  Francisco Soriano; Lorena Huelves; Plinio Naves; Violeta Rodríguez-Cerrato; Gema del Prado; Vicente Ruiz; Carmen Ponte
Journal:  J Antimicrob Chemother       Date:  2008-12-04       Impact factor: 5.790

7.  Commonly used disinfectants fail to eradicate Salmonella enterica biofilms from food contact surface materials.

Authors:  M Corcoran; D Morris; N De Lappe; J O'Connor; P Lalor; P Dockery; M Cormican
Journal:  Appl Environ Microbiol       Date:  2013-12-20       Impact factor: 4.792

8.  Susceptibility of Porphyromonas gingivalis in biofilms to amoxicillin, doxycycline and metronidazole.

Authors:  T Larsen
Journal:  Oral Microbiol Immunol       Date:  2002-10

9.  The extracellular matrix Component Psl provides fast-acting antibiotic defense in Pseudomonas aeruginosa biofilms.

Authors:  Nicole Billings; MariaRamirez Millan; Marina Caldara; Roberto Rusconi; Yekaterina Tarasova; Roman Stocker; Katharina Ribbeck
Journal:  PLoS Pathog       Date:  2013-08-08       Impact factor: 6.823

10.  Physiology of Pseudomonas aeruginosa in biofilms as revealed by transcriptome analysis.

Authors:  James P Folsom; Lee Richards; Betsey Pitts; Frank Roe; Garth D Ehrlich; Albert Parker; Aurélien Mazurie; Philip S Stewart
Journal:  BMC Microbiol       Date:  2010-11-17       Impact factor: 3.605

View more
  106 in total

1.  Impact of Bacterial Membrane Fatty Acid Composition on the Failure of Daptomycin To Kill Staphylococcus aureus.

Authors:  Rym Boudjemaa; Clément Cabriel; Florence Dubois-Brissonnet; Nicolas Bourg; Guillaume Dupuis; Alexandra Gruss; Sandrine Lévêque-Fort; Romain Briandet; Marie-Pierre Fontaine-Aupart; Karine Steenkeste
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  2018-06-26       Impact factor: 5.191

2.  Zinc Acetate Potentiates the Action of Tosufloxacin against Escherichia coli Biofilm Persisters.

Authors:  Masaru Usui; Hayato Yokoo; Yutaka Tamura; Chie Nakajima; Yasuhiko Suzuki; Jean-Marc Ghigo; Christophe Beloin
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  2019-05-24       Impact factor: 5.191

3.  Activity of Hospital Disinfectants against Vegetative Cells and Spores of Clostridioides difficile Embedded in Biofilms.

Authors:  Tasnuva Rashid; Farnoosh Haghighi; Irtiza Hasan; Eugénie Bassères; M Jahangir Alam; Shreela V Sharma; Dejian Lai; Herbert L DuPont; Kevin W Garey
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  2019-12-20       Impact factor: 5.191

4.  Characterizing the transcriptional adaptation of Staphylococcus aureus to stationary phase growth.

Authors:  Andy Weiss; William H Broach; Lindsey N Shaw
Journal:  Pathog Dis       Date:  2016-05-08       Impact factor: 3.166

5.  Measuring Antimicrobial Efficacy against Biofilms: a Meta-analysis.

Authors:  Philip S Stewart; Albert E Parker
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  2019-04-25       Impact factor: 5.191

6.  Breaking the Vicious Cycle of Antibiotic Killing and Regrowth of Biofilm-Residing Pseudomonas aeruginosa.

Authors:  Mathias Müsken; Vinay Pawar; Timo Schwebs; Heike Bähre; Sebastian Felgner; Siegfried Weiss; Susanne Häussler
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  2018-11-26       Impact factor: 5.191

7.  Peptidoglycomics reveals compositional changes in peptidoglycan between biofilm- and planktonic-derived Pseudomonas aeruginosa.

Authors:  Erin M Anderson; David Sychantha; Dyanne Brewer; Anthony J Clarke; Jennifer Geddes-McAlister; Cezar M Khursigara
Journal:  J Biol Chem       Date:  2019-11-26       Impact factor: 5.157

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.  Role of Rifampin against Staphylococcal Biofilm Infections In Vitro, in Animal Models, and in Orthopedic-Device-Related Infections.

Authors:  Werner Zimmerli; Parham Sendi
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  2019-01-29       Impact factor: 5.191

10.  Direct Microscopic Observation of Human Neutrophil-Staphylococcus aureus Interaction In Vitro Suggests a Potential Mechanism for Initiation of Biofilm Infection on an Implanted Medical Device.

Authors:  Niranjan Ghimire; Brian A Pettygrove; Kyler B Pallister; James Stangeland; Shelby Stanhope; Isaac Klapper; Jovanka M Voyich; Philip S Stewart
Journal:  Infect Immun       Date:  2019-11-18       Impact factor: 3.441

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.