| Literature DB >> 29562637 |
Florentina-Daniela Munteanu1, Ana Maria Titoiu2, Jean-Louis Marty3, Alina Vasilescu4.
Abstract
This review provides a brief overview of the fabrication and properties of screen-printed electrodes and details the different opportunities to apply them for the detection of antibiotics, detection of bacteria and antibiotic susceptibility. Among the alternative approaches to costly chromatographic or ELISA methods for antibiotics detection and to lengthy culture methods for bacteria detection, electrochemical biosensors based on screen-printed electrodes present some distinctive advantages. Chemical and (bio)sensors for the detection of antibiotics and assays coupling detection with screen-printed electrodes with immunomagnetic separation are described. With regards to detection of bacteria, the emphasis is placed on applications targeting viable bacterial cells. While the electrochemical sensors and biosensors face many challenges before replacing standard analysis methods, the potential of screen-printed electrodes is increasingly exploited and more applications are anticipated to advance towards commercial analytical tools.Entities:
Keywords: antibiotic; antibiotic susceptibility; bacteria; screen-printed electrodes
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2018 PMID: 29562637 PMCID: PMC5877114 DOI: 10.3390/s18030901
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sensors (Basel) ISSN: 1424-8220 Impact factor: 3.576
Figure 1Schematic diagram of the basic screen-printing process for electrodes manufacturing. Reprinted from [54], with permission from Elsevier.
Figure 2(A) Screen-printed sensor chip with six configurations; and (B) structure details for configuration 1. Reprinted from [60], with permission from Elsevier.
Examples of (bio)sensors based on screen-printed electrodes for detection of antibiotics.
| Working Electrode 1 | Antibiotic | Matrix | Linear Range (LR)/Detection Limit (DL) | Reference |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| SPCE/AuNP/tyrosinase | Sulfamethoxazole | Buffer | LR: 20–200 µM | [ |
| Dual SPCE/Protein G | Sulfapyridine | Milk | LR: 1.92–454 nM | [ |
| Tetracycline | LR: 6.4–385 nM | |||
| Graphene/polyaniline modified screen-printed electrode coupled with UPLC | Sulfaguanidine | Buffer | LR: 0.01–10 µg/L | [ |
| Sulfadiazine | LR: 0.01–10 µg/L | |||
| Sulfamerazine | LR: 0.01–10 µg/L | |||
| Sulfamonomethoxine | LR: 0.01–10 µg/L | |||
| Sulfadoxine | LR: 0.01–10 µg/L | |||
| Sulfamethoxazole | LR: 0.01–10 µg/L | |||
| Sulfisoxazole | LR: 0.01–10 µg/L | |||
| Sulfadimethoxine | LR: 0.01–10 µg/L | |||
| Affinity Penicillin-Binding Protein Magnetosensor | Penicillin | Milk | LR: 2.3–57.3 ng mL−1 | [ |
| SPCE/MWCNT/PBNC | Sulfamethoxazole | Urine | LR: 0.1–10.0 µmol L−1 | [ |
| Trimethoprim | LR: 0.1–10.0 µmol L−1 | |||
| Screen-printed graphite electrode/antibody | Erythromycin | Bovine muscle | LR: N.D. | [ |
| Tylosin | LR: N.D. | |||
| SPCE | Gemifloxacin | Buffer | LR: 0.5–10.0 µM | [ |
| Aptamer | Ciprofloxacin | Milk | LR: 0.8–400 nM | [ |
| Serum | LR: 0.8–400 nM | |||
| Water | LR: 0.8–400 nM | |||
| Au/aptamer/cDNA strands, arch-shaped/exonuclease I | Streptomycin | Buffer | LR: 30–1500 nM | [ |
| aptamer/cDNA strands (M-shaped) | Tetracycline | Buffer | LR: 1.5 nM–3.5 µM | [ |
| Graphene-SPCE | Tetracycline | Milk, Serum | LR: 10–120 µM | [ |
| SPCE/aptamer | Tetracycline | Buffer | LR: 1 µM–5 mM | [ |
| Ratiometric ECL aptasensor | Chloramphenicol | Buffer | LR: 0.1–120 nM | [ |
| “Dual-potential” ECL aptasensor | Chloramphenicol | Buffer | LR: 0.2–150 nM | [ |
| “Dual-potential” ECL aptasensor | Malachite Green | Buffer | LR: 0.1–100 nM | |
| DNA aptamer | Penicillin | Buffer | LR: 0.4–1000 µg/L | [ |
| DNA aptamer | Kanamycin | Milk | LR: 1.2–75 ng mL−1 | [ |
| thiolated aptamer /SPCE/AuNPs/magnetic double-charged diazoniabicyclo [2.2.2] octane dichloride silica hybrid | Epirubicin | Buffer | LR: 0.07–1.0 µM | [ |
| Calixarene/carbon nanotubes screen-printed sensors | Gentamicin Sulfate | Water | LR: 10−7–10−2 µM | [ |
| bssDNA aptamer/SA-SPAuE | Tetracycline | Buffer | LR: 10 nM–10 µM | [ |
| SPCE/AuNPs/cysteine SAM | Tetracycline | Urine | LR: 4–800 µM | [ |
| Serum | LR: 4–700 µM | |||
| Milk | LR: 4–700 µM | |||
| Cefixime | Urine | LR: 2–700 µM | ||
| Serum | LR: 2–500 µM | |||
| Milk | LR: 2–500 µM | |||
1 SPCE: screen-printed carbon electrode; AuNP: gold nanoparticles; SPAuE: screen-printed gold electrode; SAM: self-assembled monolayer; ECL: electrochemiluminescence; MWCNT/PBNC: multi-walled carbon nanotubes decorated with Prussian Blue nanocubes; cDNA: complementary DNA; bssDNA: biotinylated single strand DNA; SA: streptavidin; UPLC: ultra-performance liquid chromatography.
Figure 3(A) Image of the screen-printed sensor including a carbon working electrode modified with MWCNT-PBNC (in the center), a Ag/AgCl reference (left) and a carbon counter electrode (right side). (B) Transmission electron microscopy (TEM) image of MWCNT-PBNC composite used for working electrode modification. (C) DPV of MWCNT-PBNC-SPE in 0.04 mol L−1 Britton Robinson buffer pH 7.0 in equimolar mixtures of SMX and TMP with increasing concentrations: (a) 0 µmol L−1; (b) 1 µmol L−1; (c) 2 µmol L−1; (d) 4 µmol L−1; (e) 6 µmol L−1; (f) 8 µmol L−1; and (g) 10 µmol L−1. Adapted from [37] with permission from Elsevier.
Figure 4Schematic illustration of tetracycline detection based on electrochemical method. In the absence of tetracycline, the M-shape structure of Apt-CSs complex remains intact and redox probe could not have access to the surface of electrode, leading to a weak electrochemical signal (a). In the presence of tetracycline, Apt binds to tetracycline and leaves the CSs. Exo I degrades CS1 and CS2, resulting in the free access of redox mediator to the surface of electrode and a strong electrochemical signal (b). Reprinted from [42] with permission from Elsevier.
Examples of biosensors based on screen-printed electrodes for the detection of bacteria and evaluation of antibiotic resistance.
| Bacteria/Sample | Sensor Configuration 1 | Analytical Performance | Reference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Electrochemical Impedance Spectroscopy | |||
| SPCE modified with Au NP; aptamer | DL: 600 cfu mL−1; | [ | |
| Graphene electrode; bacteriophage | DL: 2 cfu | [ | |
| SPCE; T4 phage | DL: 104 cfu mL−1, onset of lysis observed after 20 min | [ | |
| phage-functionalized screen-printed carbon microarrays; T4 phage-magnetic beads; | DL: 103 cfu mL−1 | [ | |
| SPCE; peptide nucleic acid, | DL: 200 nM | [ | |
| SPAuE; peptide nucleic acid | DL: 10 nM (synthetic targets), 100 pM (PCR products) | [ | |
| Interdigitated electrodes; antibody | Analysis time: <90 min; AST, 6 antibiotics tested; results compared with bacteria viability and conventional antibiogram assay | [ | |
| Amperometry | |||
| SPCE; activity of β- | DL: 1 cfu/100 mL for an incubation time of 8 h. | [ | |
| Differential Pulse Voltammetry | |||
| Thin film Pt electrode; engineered T7 phage; release of β-galactosidase | 105 cfu mL−1 for 3 h interaction; | [ | |
| Square Wave Voltammetry | |||
| Screen-printed stencil electrodes on transparent film; release of β-galactosidase and β-glucuronidase ( | DL: 10 cfu mL−1
| [ | |
| SPCE modified with didodecyldimethylammonium bromide | Test time: 2–5 h; resistance to cefepime, ampicillin, amikacin, and erythromycin | [ | |
| Chronocoulometry | |||
| Screen-printed carbon electrode arrays modified with poly- | IC50 chloramphenicol: 2.0 ± 0.2 mM; 17 antibiotics tested; 20 min test time; measurement of bacterial respiratory activity | [ | |
1 SPCE: screen-printed carbon electrodes; DL: detection limit; PNP: p-nitrophenol; SPAuE: screen-printed gold electrode.
Figure 5FE-SEM images of: blank SPE (A); and bacteriophage immobilized SPE (B). Reproduced from [99] with permission from Elsevier.
Figure 6Reprinted from [116] with permission from ACS. Stencil printed carbon electrodes on transparency film shown as a (A) printed sheet that is (B) flexible. (C) A single printed electrode image showing carbon working (WE), silver paint reference (RE), and carbon counter (CE) electrode geometries and connections. (D) Final device image with 30 µL of solution contained within the central well and connected to potentiostat leads.
Figure 7(A) SWV for increasing concentration of PAP and calibration plot in PBS buffer pH 6.5; and (B) electrochemical and colorimetric response of centrifuged and resuspended E. faecalis incubated for 2 h with PNP-gluco substrate. Adapted from [116] with permission from ACS.
Figure 8Schematic representation of the electrochemical detection of E. coli using engineered phages. Specific capture and infection of E. coli by T7lacZ phage resulted in the release and overexpression of β-galactosidase. PAPG was catalyzed by β-galactosidase into PAP which can be quantified with the electrochemical device. Reproduced in part from [115], with permission from ACS.