Literature DB >> 27444546

Quantifying implant-associated biofilms: Comparison of microscopic, microbiologic and biochemical methods.

Katharina Doll1, Katrin L Jongsthaphongpun2, Nico S Stumpp2, Andreas Winkel2, Meike Stiesch2.   

Abstract

Biofilm-associated infections pose severe problems in modern implant medicine. Screening for new implant materials with antibacterial properties requires reliable quantification of colonizing bacteria. There are many different methods to quantify biofilms on solid surfaces in vitro, employing different (bio-)chemical/microbiological reference parameters. It is therefore difficult to compare studies with different quantification techniques. Here, we have evaluated commonly used microscopic, microbiologic and biochemical methods to quantify bacterial biofilms, in order to clarify their comparability and applicability. Two bacterial species frequently involved in biofilm-associated infections, Staphylococcus aureus and Aggregatibacter actinomycetemcomitans, were used as model organisms; their initial adhesion and biofilm formation on titanium and on antibacterial copper were analyzed using the following methods: LIVE/DEAD fluorescence staining and confocal laser-scanning microscopy, ultrasonic or a newly developed enzymatic detachment followed by standard plate counting (CFU method), a resazurin-based assay, the BacTiter-Glo™ assay and crystal violet staining. The methods differed greatly in complexity, reliability and the applicability to initial adhesion and biofilm formation. To screen biofilm formation on a multitude of surfaces, the resazurin-based and the BacTiterGlo™ assay are well suited. LIVE/DEAD staining and confocal laser-scanning microscopy can be applied for a more detailed analysis of both, initial adhesion and biofilm formation. When using the CFU method for screening purposes, the introduced enzymatic detachment procedure is to be favored over ultrasonic detachment. There is not one single method, which is suitable for all purposes. The appropriate biofilm quantification method has to be chosen on the basis of the specific scientific question.
Copyright © 2016 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  ATP bioluminescence; Biofilm quantification; CFU; Crystal violet; LIVE/DEAD staining; Resazurin

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27444546     DOI: 10.1016/j.mimet.2016.07.016

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Microbiol Methods        ISSN: 0167-7012            Impact factor:   2.363


  23 in total

Review 1.  The role of biofilm in the development and dissemination of ubiquitous pathogens in drinking water distribution systems: an overview of surveillance, outbreaks, and prevention.

Authors:  Bahaa A Hemdan; Gamila E El-Taweel; Pranab Goswami; Deepak Pant; Surajbhan Sevda
Journal:  World J Microbiol Biotechnol       Date:  2021-01-28       Impact factor: 3.312

Review 2.  Options and Limitations in Clinical Investigation of Bacterial Biofilms.

Authors:  Maria Magana; Christina Sereti; Anastasios Ioannidis; Courtney A Mitchell; Anthony R Ball; Emmanouil Magiorkinis; Stylianos Chatzipanagiotou; Michael R Hamblin; Maria Hadjifrangiskou; George P Tegos
Journal:  Clin Microbiol Rev       Date:  2018-04-04       Impact factor: 26.132

3.  A diguanylate cyclase regulates biofilm formation in Rhodococcus sp. NJ-530 from Antarctica.

Authors:  Xixi Wang; Yingying He; Yashan Deng; Zhicong Zuo; Dan Li; Fushan Chen; Changfeng Qu; Jinlai Miao
Journal:  3 Biotech       Date:  2021-12-25       Impact factor: 2.406

4.  Antibacterial properties and abrasion-stability: Development of a novel silver-compound material for orthodontic bracket application.

Authors:  Hannah Denis; Richard Werth; Andreas Greuling; Rainer Schwestka-Polly; Meike Stiesch; Viktoria Meyer-Kobbe; Katharina Doll
Journal:  J Orofac Orthop       Date:  2022-07-18       Impact factor: 2.341

5.  Study of the effects of mineral salts on the biofilm formation on polypropylene fibers using three quantification methods.

Authors:  Lukáš Bystrianský; Martina Hujslová; Milan Gryndler
Journal:  Folia Microbiol (Praha)       Date:  2020-10-26       Impact factor: 2.099

6.  DEBS - a unification theory for dry eye and blepharitis.

Authors:  James M Rynerson; Henry D Perry
Journal:  Clin Ophthalmol       Date:  2016-12-09

7.  Antimicrobial Effects of Sulfonyl Derivative of 2(5H)-Furanone against Planktonic and Biofilm Associated Methicillin-Resistant and -Susceptible Staphylococcus aureus.

Authors:  Irshad S Sharafutdinov; Elena Y Trizna; Diana R Baidamshina; Maria N Ryzhikova; Regina R Sibgatullina; Alsu M Khabibrakhmanova; Liliya Z Latypova; Almira R Kurbangalieva; Elvira V Rozhina; Mareike Klinger-Strobel; Rawil F Fakhrullin; Mathias W Pletz; Mikhail I Bogachev; Airat R Kayumov; Oliwia Makarewicz
Journal:  Front Microbiol       Date:  2017-11-20       Impact factor: 5.640

8.  ASK2 Bioactive Compound Inhibits MDR Klebsiella pneumoniae by Antibiofilm Activity, Modulating Macrophage Cytokines and Opsonophagocytosis.

Authors:  Cheepurupalli Lalitha; Thiagarajan Raman; Sudarshan S Rathore; Manikandan Ramar; Arumugam Munusamy; Jayapradha Ramakrishnan
Journal:  Front Cell Infect Microbiol       Date:  2017-08-04       Impact factor: 5.293

9.  Evaluation of biofilm colonization on multi-part dental implants in a rat model.

Authors:  Eva Blank; Jasmin Grischke; Andreas Winkel; Joerg Eberhard; Nadine Kommerein; Katharina Doll; Ines Yang; Meike Stiesch
Journal:  BMC Oral Health       Date:  2021-06-18       Impact factor: 2.757

Review 10.  Fungal Biofilms and Polymicrobial Diseases.

Authors:  Caroline B Costa-Orlandi; Janaina C O Sardi; Nayla S Pitangui; Haroldo C de Oliveira; Liliana Scorzoni; Mariana C Galeane; Kaila P Medina-Alarcón; Wanessa C M A Melo; Mônica Y Marcelino; Jaqueline D Braz; Ana Marisa Fusco-Almeida; Maria José S Mendes-Giannini
Journal:  J Fungi (Basel)       Date:  2017-05-10
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.