| Literature DB >> 35847089 |
Xiaojun Mao1, Andreas Hiergeist2, David L Auer1, Konstantin J Scholz1, Denise Muehler1, Karl-Anton Hiller1, Tim Maisch3, Wolfgang Buchalla1, Elmar Hellwig4, André Gessner2, Ali Al-Ahmad4, Fabian Cieplik1.
Abstract
Antiseptics are widely used in dental practice and included in numerous over-the-counter oral care products. However, the effects of routine antiseptic use on microbial composition of oral biofilms and on the emergence of resistant phenotypes remain unclear. Microcosm biofilms were inoculated from saliva samples of four donors and cultured in the Amsterdam Active Attachment biofilm model for 3 days. Then, they were treated two times daily with chlorhexidine digluconate (CHX) or cetylpyridinium chloride (CPC) for a period of 7 days. Ecological changes upon these multiple antiseptic treatments were evaluated by semiconductor-based sequencing of bacterial 16S rRNA genes and identification of amplicon sequence variants (ASVs). Furthermore, culture-based approaches were used for colony-forming units (CFU) assay, identification of antiseptic-resistant phenotypes using an agar dilution method, and evaluation of their antibiotic susceptibilities. Both CHX and CPC showed only slight effects on CFU and could not inhibit biofilm growth despite the two times daily treatment for 7 days. Both antiseptics showed significant ecological effects on the microbial compositions of the surviving microbiota, whereby CHX led to enrichment of rather caries-associated saccharolytic taxa and CPC led to enrichment of rather gingivitis-associated proteolytic taxa. Antiseptic-resistant phenotypes were isolated on antiseptic-containing agar plates, which also exhibited phenotypic resistance to various antibiotics. Our results highlight the need for further research into potential detrimental effects of antiseptics on the microbial composition of oral biofilms and on the spread of antimicrobial resistance in the context of their frequent use in oral healthcare.Entities:
Keywords: antibiotic; antiseptic; biocide; biofilm; cetylpyridinium chloride; chlorhexidine; dysbiosis; resistance
Year: 2022 PMID: 35847089 PMCID: PMC9280182 DOI: 10.3389/fmicb.2022.934525
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Microbiol ISSN: 1664-302X Impact factor: 6.064
FIGURE 1Alpha-diversity of the biofilms as shown by observed ASVs (A) and effective Shannon index (B). CHX-treated biofilms showed significantly lower alpha-diversity as compared to NaCl-treated or CPC-treated biofilms with no significant differences between the latter. Significance levels are indicated by asterisks: **p ≤ 0.01, ***p ≤ 0.001, ****p ≤ 0.0001.
FIGURE 2Heatmap of ASV abundance on genus level for NaCl-, CHX-, and CPC-treated biofilms from all four donors.
FIGURE 3Beta-diversity analysis by principal coordinate analysis (PCoA) of weighted UniFrac distances for NaCl-, CHX-, and CPC-treated biofilms from all four donors. Ellipses indicate the 95% confidence interval of group centroids summarized for donors (A) or treatments (B). Depicted are coordinates 1 and 2, which explained 63.5% of the total variance. (Adonis NaCl vs. CHX: R2 = 0.42, p.adj = 0.003, NaCl vs. CPC: R2 = 0.23, p.adj = 0.003, CHX vs. CPC: R2 = 0.36, p.adj = 0.003).
FIGURE 4Discriminatory ASVs for biofilms treated with NaCl, CPC, or CHX, respectively, as identified by linear discriminant analysis (LDA) effect size (LEfSe). ASVs exhibiting LDA-score ≥ 4 and adjusted p-values < 0.01 are shown.
FIGURE 5The CFU results following two times daily treatment with either 0.9% NaCl, 0.1% CHX, or 0.05% CPC for a period of 7 days. All results are depicted as medians, 1st and 3rd quartiles from eight individual biological replicates on a log10-scaled ordinate.
Antiseptic-resistant phenotypes isolated from the biofilms and evaluation of antibiotic susceptibilities.
| A. Antiseptic-resistant phenotypes and evaluation of their antibiotic susceptibilities by means of ETEST® | |||||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
| Beta-lactams | Fluoroquinolones | Macrolides and Lincosamides | Tetracycline | Nitroimidazole | |||||||||||
|
|
|
| |||||||||||||
| Donor | Treatment group | Growth on plate | Identification by MALDI-TOF MS | Penicillin G | Ampicillin | Amoxicillin/clavulanic acid | Piperacillin/tazobactam | Imipenem | Ceftriaxone Cefotaxime | Ceftazidime | Ciprofloxacin | Erythromycin | Clindamycin | Tetracycline | Metronidazole |
| 1 | NaCl | 0.01% CHX |
| 0.002 | 0.016 | 0.016 | 0.016 | 0.002 | 0.006 | 0.032 | 0.003 | 0.125 | 0.006 | 0.023 | 0.047 |
| 1 | NaCl | 0.01% CPC |
| 2 | 0.032 | 0.032 | 24 | 0.094 | 0.064 | 0.125 | ≥ 32 | 4 | 0.25 | 0.19 | ≥ 256 |
| 1 | CPC | 0.01% CPC |
| 4 | 0.094 | 0.032 | 48 | 0.125 | 0.094 | 0.25 | ≥32 | 4 | 0.75 | 0.75 | ≥256 |
| 3 | NaCl | 0.01% CHX |
| 0.002 | 0.016 | 0.016 | 0.016 | 0.002 | 0.002 | 0.016 | 0.006 | 0.125 | 0.016 | 0.023 | 0.016 |
| 3 | NaCl | 0.01% CHX |
| 0.016 | 0.023 | 0.023 | 0.016 | 0.032 | 0.5 | 0.38 | 0.006 | ≥256 | 0.006 | 0.047 | 3 |
| 3 | NaCl | 0.01% CPC | ≥32 | ≥256 | 0.016 | 0.19 | 0.047 | 1 | 3 | 0.75 | 4 | 0.75 | 0.19 | 0.016 | |
| 3 | NaCl | 0.01% CPC |
| 0.125 | 0.094 | 0.094 | 0.75 | 0.125 | 0.25 | 8 | 0.032 | 16 | ≥256 | 0.064 | 0.38 |
| 3 | NaCl | 0.01% CPC |
| 1 | 0.032 | 0.032 | 24 | 0.19 | 0.032 | 0.38 | 0.047 | 2 | 1.5 | 0.19 | 6 |
| 3 | CHX | 0.05% CHX |
| 6 | 1.5 | 1.5 | 1 | 0.75 | 0.19 |
| 0.012 | 32 | 32 | 1.5 | 256 |
| 3 | CPC | 0.05% CPC |
| 0.25 | 0.19 | 0.19 | 0.19 | 0.064 | 0.25 | 8 | 0.047 | 24 | ≥ 256 | 0.125 | 0.38 |
(A) The first line shows the respective ETEST
(B) The first line shows the respective MIC [μg/mL], while the second line gives the interpretation according to EUCAST 12.0 (S, susceptible; I, intermediate;