| Literature DB >> 33274280 |
Zheng Hou1,2, Yang Wu1,2, Chen Xu1,2, Sheethal Reghu1,2, Zifang Shang3, Jingjie Chen3, Dicky Pranantyo4, Kalisvar Marimuth5,6,7, Partha Pratim De5, Oon Tek Ng8,5,7, Kevin Pethe8, En-Tang Kang4, Peng Li3, Mary B Chan-Park1,2,9,8.
Abstract
Gram-negative bacteria cannot be easily eradicated by antibiotics and are a major source of recalcitrant infections of indwelling medical devices. Among various device-associated infections, intravascular catheter infection is a leading cause of mortality. Prior approaches to surface modification, such as antibiotics impregnation, hydrophilization, unstructured NO-releasing, etc., have failed to achieve adequate infection-resistant coatings. We report a precision-structured diblock copolymer brush (H(N)-b-S) composed of a surface antifouling block of poly(sulfobetaine methacrylate) (S) and a subsurface bactericidal block (H(N)) of nitric-oxide-emitting functionalized poly(hydroxyethyl methacrylate) (H) covalently grafted from the inner and outer surfaces of a polyurethane catheter. The block copolymer architecture of the coating is important for achieving good broad-spectrum anti-biofilm activity with good biocompatibility and low fouling. The coating procedure is scalable to clinically useful catheter lengths. Only the block copolymer brush coating ((H(N)-b-S)) shows unprecedented, above 99.99%, in vitro biofilm inhibition of Gram-positive and Gram-negative bacteria, 100-fold better than previous coatings. It has negligible toxicity toward mammalian cells and excellent blood compatibility. In a murine subcutaneous infection model, it achieves >99.99% biofilm reduction of Gram-positive and Gram-negative bacteria compared with <90% for silver catheter, while in a porcine central venous catheter infection model, it achieves >99.99% reduction of MRSA with 5-day implantation. This precision coating is readily applicable for long-term biofilm-resistant and blood-compatible copolymer coatings covalently grafted from a wide range of medical devices.Entities:
Year: 2020 PMID: 33274280 PMCID: PMC7706084 DOI: 10.1021/acscentsci.0c00755
Source DB: PubMed Journal: ACS Cent Sci ISSN: 2374-7943 Impact factor: 14.553
Figure 1Illustrations and synthesis scheme of antifouling and nitric oxide (NO) emitting diblock copolymer brush ((#10) H(N)-b-S) grafted from a PU catheter: (A) The diblock copolymer with a subsurface NO-emitting block modified from poly(HEMA) (H) with a RSNO (N) and a surface block of antifouling poly(SBMA) (S). (B) Flow reactor for surface modification of a long catheter with long narrow lumen (gray arrows: flow of monomer solution). (C) Synthesis scheme of diblock copolymer (#10) H(N)-b-S coating via ozone pretreatment of PU followed by surface-initiated RAFT diblock copolymerization. (CTA is chain transfer agent of 4-cyano-4-(phenylcarbonothioylthio) pentanoic acid (CPCPA), and ACVA is the thermal initiator 4,4′-azobis(4-cyanopentanoic acid)).
Summary of Coating Polymers on Polyurethane Catheter
| coating no. | label | coating polymer | method of synthesis | synthetic scheme |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | unmodified | none | uncoated | |
| 2 | silver | commercial silver coated catheter | purchased | |
| 3 | S | homo poly(SBMA) | free radical polymerization of SBMA | |
| 4 | H(N) | homo poly(HEMA-NO) | free radical polymerization of HEMA and then reaction with NO-donor (NTMB-Cl) | |
| 5 | H- | cross-linked hydrogel
of poly(SBMA- | free radical copolymerization of SBMA, HEMA with cross-linker | |
| 6 | H- | poly(HEMA- | free radical copolymerization of SBMA and HEMA | |
| 7 | H- | poly(HEMA- | RAFT block copolymerization of HEMA followed by SBMA | |
| 8 | H(N)- | cross-linked
hydrogel of poly(SBMA- | free radical copolymerization of SBMA, HEMA with cross-linker and then reaction with NTMB-Cl | |
| 9 | H(N)- | poly((HEMA-NO)- | free radical copolymerization of SBMA and HEMA and then reaction with NTMB-Cl | |
| 10 | H(N)- | poly((HEMA-NO)- | RAFT block copolymerization of HEMA followed by SBMA then reaction with NTMB-Cl |
Figure 2Characterization of (#10) H(N)-b-S coating: (A) Visual appearance of long (i) (#1) unmodified and (ii) (#10) H(N)-b-S coated catheters. (B) FTIR-ATR characterization of steps in the synthesis of (#10) block copolymer coating: (i) unmodified PU control, (ii) first block of poly(HEMA), (iii) after second block copolymerization to make (#7) H-b-S, (iv) reaction of RSNO-Cl with subsurface poly(HEMA) block to get (#10) H(N)-b-S. (C) SEM characterizations (scale bar = 10 μm): surface and cross section (inset) of (i) (#1) unmodified PU and (ii) (#10) H(N)-b-S. (D) 3D AFM characterization of (i) unmodified PU catheter and (ii) (#10) H(N)-b-S. (E) Water contact angle change of (#10) H(N)-b-S over 1-month incubation in water. (F) HPLC detection of NO release precursor (NTMB-Cl) leaching to different solvents (N.D. refers to no detection of leaching). (G) NO release flux of (#10) H(N)-b-S coating at 37 °C over 15 days.
Figure 3(A) 24 h-anti-biofilm efficacy of coatings measured by static media model against broad-spectrum Gram-negative and Gram-positive bacteria. The general log reduction of #10 is compared with other catheter coating controls by Student’s t test, ****P < 0.0001, ***P < 0.001, **P < 0.01, *P < 0.05. (B) Long-term (30 days) intraluminal antibiofilm effect against (i) MRSA and (ii) P. aeruginosa bacteria.
Figure 4Biocompatibility and hemocompatibility of coatings: (A) Antithrombogenic effect of coatings measured by platelet activation and amount thrombus formation. (B) SEM images of thrombus formed on catheters (Left: before incubation with rabbit whole blood. Right: after 2 h incubation with rabbit whole blood) (i) (#1) unmodified catheter, (ii) (#10) H(N)-b-S (scale bar = 10 μm). (C) Activation of blood immune cells. Student’s t test of #10 against blood w/o treatment, n.s. P > 0.05. (D) Blood protein fouling on catheters after 24 h incubation with protein or serum. Student’s t test of #10 against unmodified catheter, ****P < 0.0001, **P < 0.01.
Figure 5In vivo antibacterial efficacy of coated catheters: (A) Murine subcutaneous 24 h implantation infection model (i) illustration of subcutaneous implantation and infection, (ii) antibiofilm efficacy of catheters (#8, #9, and #10) against antibiotic-sensitive and multidrug resistant (MDR) bacteria, (iii) appearance of MDR PAER infected subcutaneous pockets after 24 h implantation. (a) pus (red circle) found in the subcutaneous pocket implanted with (#1) unmodified catheter (b) minimal pus found in the subcutaneous pocket implanted with (#10) H(N)-b-S catheter. The general log reduction of #10 is compared with other catheter coating controls by Student’s t test, (#2) silver catheter, ****P < 0.0001, (#8) catheter, ***P < 0.001, (#9) catheter, **P < 0.01. (B) Porcine central venous catheter model with MRSA: (i) illustration of catheter implantation in porcine jugular vein and infection Pig III, (ii) biofilm (yellow arrow, and subfigure) and thrombus formation (red arrow) on catheters observed under SEM (scale bar = 50 μm) with (a) (#1) unmodified PU catheter (b) (#10) H(N)-b-S catheter. (iii) antibiofilm efficacy of catheter (#10) H(N)-b-S.