| Literature DB >> 34900167 |
Forough Goodarzi1, Masoumeh Hallajzadeh1, Mohammad Sholeh1, Malihe Talebi1, Vahid Pirhajati Mahabadi2,3, Nour Amirmozafari1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: An important leading cause of the emergence of vancomycin-resistant enterococci, especially Enterococcus faecium, is the inefficiency of antibiotics in the elimination of drug-resistant pathogens. Consequently, the need for alternative treatments is more necessary than ever.Entities:
Keywords: Antibiotic-resistance; Biofilm; Enterococcus faecium; Phage therapy; Vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus faecium
Year: 2021 PMID: 34900167 PMCID: PMC8629820 DOI: 10.18502/ijm.v13i5.7436
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Iran J Microbiol ISSN: 2008-3289
The Primer sequences used in the multiplex PCR assay
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|
|
| 5′-TTGAGGCAGACCAGATTGACG | 658 | ( |
| 5′-TATGACAGCGACTCCGATTCC | |||
|
| 5′ATGAATAGAATAAAAGTTGCAATA | 1030 | ( |
| 5′-CCCCTTTAACGCTAATACGATCAA |
Fig. 1.Electrophoresis of multiplex PCR products of E. faecium-specific and vanA genes on the 0.1% agarose gel with100-bp DNA ladder. Lane 1: 100-bp DNA ladder (SMO Bio), Lane 2: Negative control, Lane 3: positive control, Lane 4: Clinical strain (A). Morphology of phage S2 plaques in the DLA method (B). Transmission electron microscopy (TEM) micrograph of phage S2. The scale bar represents 100 nm (C).
Lytic spectrum of phage S2 against a panel of clinical isolates
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|
| VREfm | 34 | 82.3% |
|
| 1 | Not susceptible |
|
| 13 | Not susceptible |
|
| 6 | Not susceptible |
Fig. 2.Survival rate of phage S2 at different temperatures (A). Stability of phage S2 at different pH levels (B). Absorption rate of phage S2 in the presence of magnesium and calcium ions (C). Survival rate of phage S2 after exposure to 1 or 2% bile salts (D). One-step growth curve of phage S2 (E).
Fig. 3.Inhibitory effect of phage S2 on VREfm2 biofilm. Nonlinear regression diagram of the assessment of biofilm inhibition. Comparison of biofilm inhibition by phage S2 at different time intervals (days 1-7) compared to the control at 630 nm.
Fig. 4.Disruptive effect of phage S2 on VREfm2 biofilms. Nonlinear regression diagram of biofilm disruption assessments. Biofilm disruption with phage S2 at different time intervals (days 1–7) compared to the control at 630 nm.
Fig. 5.Colony-forming unit assay for the enumeration of living cells in VREfm2 biofilms. Log10 CFU of live VREfm2 in different days. Biofilm was treated with and without the phage under inhibition (A) and disruption (B) conditions.