| Literature DB >> 32604867 |
Mona Shaaban1, Ola A Abd El-Rahman2, Bashair Al-Qaidi3, Hossam M Ashour4,5.
Abstract
The emergence of biofilm-forming, multi-drug-resistant (MDR) Proteus mirabilis infections is a serious threat that necessitates non-antibiotic therapies. Antibiotic susceptibility and biofilm-forming activity of P. mirabilis isolates from urine samples were assessed by disc diffusion and crystal violet assays, respectively. Antimicrobial activities of probiotic Lactobacilli were evaluated by agar diffusion. Antibiofilm and anti-adherence activities were evaluated by crystal violet assays. While most P. mirabilis isolates were antibiotic-resistant to varying degrees, isolate P14 was MDR (resistant to ceftazidime, cefotaxime, amoxicillin-clavulanic acid, imipenem, ciprofloxacin, and amikacin) and formed strong biofilms. Cultures and cell-free supernatants of Lactobacillus casei and Lactobacillus reuteri exhibited antimicrobial and antibiofilm activities. The 1/16 concentration of untreated supernatants of L. casei and L. reuteri significantly reduced mature biofilm formation and adherence of P14 by 60% and 72%, respectively (for L. casei), and by 73% each (for L. reuteri). The 1/8 concentration of pH-adjusted supernatants of L. casei and L. reuteri significantly reduced mature biofilm formation and adherence of P14 by 39% and 75%, respectively (for L. casei), and by 73% each (for L. reuteri). Scanning electron microscopy (SEM) confirmed eradication of P14's biofilm by L. casei. L. casei and L. reuteri could be utilized to combat Proteus-associated urinary tract infections.Entities:
Keywords: Lactobacillus; Proteus mirabilis; anti-adherence; antibiofilm
Year: 2020 PMID: 32604867 PMCID: PMC7355612 DOI: 10.3390/microorganisms8060960
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Microorganisms ISSN: 2076-2607
Antimicrobial susceptibility patterns of P. mirabilis isolates.
| Isolate No. | FOX | CAZ | CTX | AMC | IMP | CIP | AK | Biofilm Formation |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| S | S | S | S | S | S | S | Strong |
|
| S | S | S | R | I | I | S | Strong |
|
| S | R | R | R | I | R | R | Strong |
|
| S | S | S | I | I | S | S | Moderate |
|
| S | R | R | R | S | R | R | Moderate |
|
| S | R | R | R | S | R | R | Strong |
|
| S | R | R | R | S | R | R | Strong |
FOX: Cefoxitin; CAZ: Ceftazidime; CTX: Cefotaxime; AMC: Amoxicillin-Clavulanic acid; IMP: Imipenem; CIP: Ciprofloxacin and AK: Amikacin. S: Sensitive, R: Resistant, and I: Intermediate.
Antimicrobial activities of L. casei and L. reuteri against P. mirabilis isolates.
| Inhibition Zone Diameter (mm) | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Isolate No. | ||||||
| C | T | U | C | T | U | |
|
| 20 | 13 | 20 | 20 | 15 | 20 |
|
| 20 | - | 21 | 21 | 16 | 20 |
|
| 18 | 14 | 18 | 20 | 14 | 20 |
|
| 20 | 16 | 20 | 20 | 15 | 18 |
|
| 19 | - | 20 | 20 | 15 | 20 |
|
| 20 | 14 | 20 | 20 | 12 | 19 |
|
| 20 | - | 20 | 20 | - | 18 |
C: The Lactobacillus Culture; T: The treated (pH-adjusted) cell-free supernatants of Lactobacillus; U: The untreated cell-free supernatants of Lactobacillus; -: No effect.
Figure 1Effect of supernatants of L. casei and L. reuteri on mature biofilm formation of Proteus mirabilis isolates P2, P4, P14, P15, P23, P24, and P25 (* p < 0.05). (A) Effect of untreated supernatants of L. casei and L. reuteri on mature biofilm formation of Proteus mirabilis isolates P2, P4, P14, P15, P23, P24, and P25 (* p < 0.05). (B) Effect of treated supernatants of L. casei and L. reuteri on mature biofilm formation of Proteus mirabilis isolates P2, P4, P14, P15, P23, P24, and P25 (* p < 0.05).
Figure 2Effect of supernatants of L. casei and L. reuteri on mature biofilm formation of the P. mirabilis isolate P14 (* p < 0.05). (A) Effect of untreated supernatants of L. casei on mature biofilm formation of the Proteus isolate P14 (* p < 0.05). (B) Effect of treated supernatants of L. casei on mature biofilm formation of the Proteus isolate P14 (* p < 0.05). (C) Effect of untreated supernatants of L. reuteri on mature biofilm formation of the Proteus isolate P14 (* p < 0.05). (D) Effect of treated supernatants of L. reuteri on mature biofilm formation of the Proteus isolate P14 (* p < 0.05).
Figure 3Adherence of the Proteus isolate P14 in the presence of supernatants of L. casei and L. reuteri (* p < 0.05). (A) Adherence of the Proteus isolate P14 in the presence of untreated supernatants of L. casei (* p < 0.05). (B) Adherence of the Proteus isolate P14 in the presence of treated supernatants of L. casei (* p < 0.05). (C) Adherence of the Proteus isolate P14 in the presence of untreated supernatants of L. reuteri (* p < 0.05). (D) Adherence of the Proteus isolate P14 in the presence of treated supernatants of L. reuteri (* p < 0.05).
Figure 4Scanning Electron micrographs (SEM) (magnification: × 15,000). (A) Biofilm formation of the P14 isolate in the absence of Lactobacillus spp. (control). (B) Biofilm formation of the P14 isolate in the presence of L. casei. (C) Biofilm formation of the P14 isolate in the presence of L. reuteri.