| Literature DB >> 34770799 |
Yin-Ku Lin1,2, Shih-Chun Yang3, Ching-Yun Hsu4,5, Jui-Tai Sung3, Jia-You Fang3,5,6.
Abstract
Biofilm formation is an important virulence factor for the opportunistic microorganisms that elicit skin infections. The recalcitrant feature of biofilms and their antibiotic tolerance impose a great challenge on the use of conventional therapies. Most antibacterial agents have difficulty penetrating the matrix produced by a biofilm. One novel approach to address these concerns is to prevent or inhibit the formation of biofilms using nanoparticles. The advantages of using nanosystems for antibiofilm applications include high drug loading efficiency, sustained or prolonged drug release, increased drug stability, improved bioavailability, close contact with bacteria, and enhanced accumulation or targeting to biomasses. Topically applied nanoparticles can act as a strategy for enhancing antibiotic delivery into the skin. Various types of nanoparticles, including metal oxide nanoparticles, polymeric nanoparticles, liposomes, and lipid-based nanoparticles, have been employed for topical delivery to treat biofilm infections on the skin. Moreover, nanoparticles can be designed to combine with external stimuli to produce magnetic, photothermal, or photodynamic effects to ablate the biofilm matrix. This study focuses on advanced antibiofilm approaches based on nanomedicine for treating skin infections. We provide in-depth descriptions on how the nanoparticles could effectively eliminate biofilms and any pathogens inside them. We then describe cases of using nanoparticles for antibiofilm treatment of the skin. Most of the studies included in this review were supported by in vivo animal infection models. This article offers an overview of the benefits of nanosystems for treating biofilms grown on the skin.Entities:
Keywords: biofilm; infection; microbe; nanoparticle; resistance; skin
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2021 PMID: 34770799 PMCID: PMC8587837 DOI: 10.3390/molecules26216392
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Molecules ISSN: 1420-3049 Impact factor: 4.411
Figure 1The intrinsic and extrinsic factors influencing the microbiome on the skin.
Figure 2The process of the microbial biofilm establishment.
The treatment strategies of biofilm eradication.
| The Strategy | Classification | The Mechanism of Eradication |
|---|---|---|
| Water spray | Mechanic force | The physical removal of biofilm by local delivery of mechanic forces |
| Water-based jet | Mechanic force | The physical removal of biofilm by local delivery of mechanic forces |
| Photodynamic therapy | Physical method | The combination of specific light irradiation and photosensitizers to produce oxidative stress |
| Photothermal therapy | Physical method | The combination of near-infrared irradiation and photothermal agents to produce local hyperthermia |
| DNase | Enzymatic degradation | Hydrolysis of the extracellular DNA |
| Proteinase K | Enzymatic degradation | Cleavage of the C-terminal peptide bond for protein digestion |
| Dispersin B | Enzymatic degradation | Biofilm-releasing enzyme from |
| Lysostaphin | Enzymatic degradation | Cleavage of pentaglycine cross-bridge in peptidoglycan |
| Mannosides | Adhesin inhibition | Target to bacterial adhesin FimH for prevent bacterial binding to surface |
| LL-37 | Antimicrobial peptide | Prevention of bacterial attachment to surface |
| Oritavancin | Antimicrobial peptide | Prevention of bacterial attachment to surface |
| Glycerol monolaurate | Antimicrobial lipid | The amphiphile nature to disrupt biofilm structure |
| Free fatty acids | Antimicrobial lipid | The amphiphile nature to disrupt biofilm structure |
| Quaternary ammonium compounds | Surfactant | The amphiphile nature to disrupt biofilm structure |
| Autoinducing peptides | QS inhibitor | Reactivates |
| Hammelitannin | QS inhibitor | QS inhibitor RNAIII-inhibiting peptide to reduce |
| AP4 antibody | QS inhibitor | Biofilm inhibition in mouse abscess infection model |
| AI-2 | QS inhibitor | Reduction of proportion of adherent bacteria and dispersal |
AI, autoinducer; QS, quorum sensing.
Figure 3The mechanisms antibiofilm nanoparticles use for eradicating pathogenic microorganisms.
Figure 4The different types of nanoparticles for inhibiting biofilms.
The application of metallic nanoparticles for antibiofilm treatment.
| Nanoparticle Type | Average Size | Infection Model | The Microorganisms Tested | Antibiofilm Efficacy | Reference |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Silver | 40, 70, or 140 nm |
| Biofilm elimination by >96% | Richter et al. [ | |
| Silver | 750 nm | Full-thickness skin wound in mice |
| A 8-log reduction of bacterial colony in biofilm | McLaughlin et al. [ |
| Silver | 5−12 nm | Full-thickness skin wound in diabetic mice | Bacterial number reduction in skin open wound | Lazurko et al. [ | |
| Silver | 9 nm | In vitro drip flow reactor model | A 2-log reduction of bacterial colony in biofilm | Alvarado-Gomez et al. [ | |
| Silver | 8−20 nm | In vitro static biofilm assay | Elimination of biomass determined by crystal violet assay | Ambrogi et al. [ | |
| Copper | 100−150 nm | 3D tissue engineered infection skin model | Elimination of biomass and biofilm metabolic activity | Paterson et al. [ | |
| Copper and silver | 7 nm | Full-thickness skin wound in mice |
| Biofilm area reduction by 70% | Jang et al. [ |
| Gold | 4 nm | MRSA-infected skin wound in rats | A 93% killing of bacterial number in biofilm | Yang et al. [ | |
| Gold | 10−20 nm | Full-thickness skin wound in rats | The biofilm is disrupted, scattered, and distorted | Raghuwanshi et al. [ | |
| Zinc | 50 and 500 nm | Intradermal injection of bacteria in mice |
| The biofilm is disintegrated | Pati et al. [ |
| Zinc | 40 nm | In vitro static biofilm assay | Biofilm growth suppression | Rayyif et al. [ | |
| Ferrous oxide with hyperthermia | About 100 nm |
| A 3-log reduction of bacterial conoly in biofilm | Kim et al. [ | |
| Gold with PPT | 14 nm | MRSA-induced abscess in rabbits | MRSA | Most of MRSA in the biofilm is killed | Hu et al. [ |
| Bismuth-silver with PPT | 15 nm | MRSA-induced abscess in mice | MRSA | Biofilm elimination by 70% | Cao et al. [ |
| Quantum dot with PTT | 11 nm | VISA-infected skin abscess in mice | VISA | Complete disruption of biofilm | Xu et al. [ |
| Gold with PDT | 10−20 nm | Cutaneous infection in mice |
| A 80% killing of fungal number in biofilm | Sherwani et al. [ |
| Zeolite with PTT | About 170 nm | VISA-infected skin abscess in mice | VISA | Biofilm elimination by 76% | Xiao et al. [ |
MRSA, methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus; PDT, photodynamic therapy; PPT, photothermal therapy; VISA, vancomycin-intermediate S. aureus.
The application of polymeric nanoparticles for antibiofilm treatment.
| Nanoparticle Type | Average Size | Infection Model | The Microorganisms Tested | Antibiofilm Efficacy | Reference |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Algal polysaccharides | About 10 nm | Biofilm elimination by 60% | El-Deeb et al. [ | ||
| PLGA | 151 nm | Biofilm under the flow condition |
| A 20-fold reduction of bacterial colony | Zhang et al. [ |
| PLGA | 240 nm | Biofilm-infected skin wound in diabetic mice | MRSA | Elimination of biomass by 67% | Hasan et al. [ |
| Hyaluronic acid | 174−194 nm |
| A 4-fold reduction of bacterial colony in abscess | Kłodzińska et al. [ | |
| PLGA and chitosan | 230 nm | MRSA-infected full-thickness wound in mice | MRSA | A 80% reduction of bacterial colony in skin wound | Wu et al. [ |
| PLGA, PCL, and chitosan | 217−263 nm | Ex vivo model of biofilm on pig skin | More than 99% of bacteria is killed | Permana et al. [ | |
| PCL | 199 nm | Ex vivo model of biofilm on pig skin | A 88−100% killing of bacterial aamount | Mir et al. [ | |
| Alginate | 179 nm | Ex vivo model of biofilm on pig skin |
| A reduction of bacterial viability in biofilm | Singh et al. [ |
MRSA, methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus; PCL, poly(ε-caprolactone); PLGA, poly(lactic-co-glycolic) acid.
The application of lipid-based nanoparticles for antibiofilm treatment.
| Nanoparticle Type | Average Size | Infection Model | The Microorganisms Tested | Antibiofilm Efficacy | Reference |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Liposomes | 111 nm | In vitro biofilm susceptibility test | Biofilm growth inhibition | Eroğlu et al. [ | |
| Liposomes | 55 nm | Subcutaneous infection in mouse skin |
| A 8-log reduction of bacterial colony in biofilm | Li et al. [ |
| Nanoemulsions | Not determined | Burn wound in mouse skin | MRSA | A 84% killing of bacterial number in biofilm | Song et al. [ |
| Nanoemulsions | 78 and 85 nm | In vitro biofilm disk assay |
| Biofilm elimination by 80% | Lewińska et al. [ |
| Liposomes and nanoemulsions | 75 and 214 nm | Subcutaneous infection in mouse skin | A 2.4-fold reduction of biofilm thickness | Lin et al. [ | |
| NLCs | 177 nm | Subcutaneous infection in mouse skin | MRSA | A 4-log reduction of bacterial colony in abscess | Alalaiwe et al. [ |
| SLNs | About 300 nm | Burn wound healing study in rats |
| Removal of 79% of biomass | Patel et al. [ |
| Lipid-polymer nanohybrids | 14 nm | Intradermal MRSA infection on mice | MRSA | A significant biofilm elimination determined by live/dead staining | Hassan et al. [ |