| Literature DB >> 35893454 |
Huiliang Cao1,2,3, Shichong Qiao4,5,6, Hui Qin7, Klaus D Jandt3,8,9.
Abstract
The uses of implantable medical devices are safer and more common since sterilization methods and techniques were established a century ago; however, device-associated infections (DAIs) are still frequent and becoming a leading complication as the number of medical device implantations keeps increasing. This urges the world to develop instructive prevention and treatment strategies for DAIs, boosting the studies on the design of antibacterial surfaces. Every year, studies associated with DAIs yield thousands of publications, which here are categorized into four groups, i.e., antibacterial surfaces with long-term efficacy, cell-selective capability, tailored responsiveness, and immune-instructive actions. These innovations are promising in advancing the solution to DAIs; whereas most of these are normally quite preliminary "proof of concept" studies lacking exact clinical scopes. To help identify the flaws of our current antibacterial designs, clinical features of DAIs are highlighted. These include unpredictable onset, site-specific incidence, and possibly involving multiple and resistant pathogenic strains. The key point we delivered is antibacterial designs should meet the specific requirements of the primary functions defined by the "intended use" of an implantable medical device. This review intends to help comprehend the complex relationship between the device, pathogens, and the host, and figure out future directions for improving the quality of antibacterial designs and promoting clinical translations.Entities:
Keywords: antibiotic resistance; antimicrobials; bacterial charging; biocompatibility; cell-selective surfaces; implantable antibacterial surfaces; polymicrobial infections; protein adsorption; surface modification; tissue integration
Year: 2022 PMID: 35893454 PMCID: PMC9326756 DOI: 10.3390/jfb13030086
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Funct Biomater ISSN: 2079-4983
Antibacterial surface registered for clinical studies *.
| Active Ingredients | Devices | Phase | Locations | First Posted |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Silver coating | Intravenous catheters | Not applicable | United States | 25 August 2009 |
| Antibiotics (minocycline and rifampin) | Antibacterial envelope for a cardiac implantable electronic device | Not applicable | United States | 7 January 2010 |
| Silver-based coating | Urinary catheter | Not applicable | United States | 10 September 2012 |
| Ionic silver | Wound dressings for a cardiac implantable electronic device | Phase 4 | United States | 24 May 2016 |
| Silver-doped hydroxyapatite coating | Orthopedic implants (hip joint prostheses, intramedullary nails, and external fixator implants) | Not applicable | Turkey | 17 November 2017 |
| Gold-silver-palladium coating | Invasive devices (endotracheal tube, central venous catheter, and urinary catheter) | Phase 1, 2 | Brazil | 11 March 2019 |
| Iodine | Barrier dressing for a cardiac implantable electronic device | Not applicable | Canada | 19 October 2020 |
| Antibiotic (gentamycin) | Platform wound device | Phase 4 | United States | 15 February 2021 |
* Data were obtained by searching for “device infection” in the “Condition or disease” field of the registered clinical studies conducted around the world on ClinicalTrials.gov (plus manual exclusion, as of 31 March 2022).
Incidence of typical device-associated infections.
| Device | Materials | Incidence | Reference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ankle arthroplasty | Metals (titanium alloys), Ceramic, Polyethylene | 2.4–8.9% | [ |
| Hip arthroplasty | Metals (titanium alloys, stainless steel), Ceramics (alumina, zirconia), Polymers (polyethylene, polyetheretherketone), Composites | 0.4–2.4% | [ |
| Knee arthroplasty | Metals (titanium alloys, cobalt-chromium alloy), Ceramics (zirconia, titanium nitride), Polymers (polyethylene,) | 1–2% | [ |
| Breast implants | Silicone | 1–10.2% | [ |
| Vascular graft/endograft | Polytetrafluoroethylene, Polyethylene Terephthalate, Nitinol | 0.16–6% | [ |
| Cardiovascular electronic devices | Plastic polymers, Titanium, Teflon, Gold, Copper | 0.9–7% | [ |
| Cochlear implant | Teflon, Platinum-iridium alloy, Silicone, Titanium, Ceramics | 1–8% | [ |
| Brain stimulation implant | Stainless steel, Platinum, Titanium oxide, Iridium oxide | 2–10% | [ |
| Urinary catheters * | Natural rubber, Polyisoprene, Polymer ethylene vinyl acetate, Polytetrafluoroethylene, Hydrogel | 0.1–13.7 cases per 1000 catheter-days | [ |
| Cerebrospinal fluid shunts | Silicone rubber | 1.9–27% | [ |
| Internal fixation devices | Stainless steel, Cobalt-chromium alloys, Titanium alloys | 7–32% | [ |
| Dental implants | Titanium, Ceramics (zirconia, alumina) | 6–47% | [ |
* The incidence of catheter-associated urinary tract infection is typically expressed as the number of infections per 1000 urinary catheter-days [52].
Representative cases showing the latent period of DAIs.
| Case | Devices | Latent Period | Pathogens | Causes | Reference |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| Alloplastic chin implant | 45 years | / | After scratching herself (soft tissue degeneration due to aging) | [ |
|
| Breast implant | Seven years | Development of a chronic footsore (hematogenous spread from distant bacterial infection sites) | [ | |
|
| Breast implant | 25 years | After extensive dental treatment (hematogenous spread from distant bacterial infection sites) | [ | |
|
| Alloplastic implant | 30 years |
| Bacterial contamination years before identifying the infection (a symptom-free chronic infection; the pathogen escaped immune clearance and antibiotic treatments) | [ |
|
| Orbital implant | 30 years | Bacterial contamination during the primary implantation (the pathogen can manifest for several decades) | [ | |
|
| Orbital implant | 26 years (implant exposure 10 years before the presentation was documented) |
| Bacterial contamination during the primary implantation or implant exposure during scleral patch graft repair | [ |
|
| Breast Implant | Five months |
| Hematogenous seeding due to developing of diarrhea during a holiday travel | [ |
|
| Generator for brain stimulation | Four months | Multispecies including the rare | Penetration of contaminated water during participating in outdoor activities | [ |
|
| Breast implant | Seven months | Bacterial contamination from a patient-owned cat | [ | |
|
| Battery for brain stimulation | Two cases (Two years or 10 years) |
| Chronic treatment of rheumatoid arthritis with methotrexate | [ |
|
| Tibia Tenodesis Implant | Four and half months | Contamination of his tibial wound by the outside facility | [ | |
|
| Knee arthroplasty | 4 months | Consuming unpasteurized dairy products (an immunocompromised patient) | [ | |
|
| Hip arthroplasty | 10 years | Breeding a dog (an immunocompromised patient) | [ | |
|
| Knee arthroplasty | Eight years | A cat scratch | [ | |
|
| Cranioplasty implant | Two years and three months | No bacteria were cultured, but the infection was clinically evident | / | [ |
|
| Shoulder prosthesis | Three years | / | [ |
Epidemiology of antibiotic-resistant DAIs.
| Case | Resistant Pathogens | Implant | Latent Period | Reference |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
| Hip arthroplasty | 12–25 days | [ |
|
|
| Cardiac pacemaker | Nine years | [ |
|
|
| Breast implant | Four days | [ |
|
|
| Transvenous lead | Four years | [ |
|
|
| Ankle fracture fixation | Eight weeks | [ |
|
|
| Cranial implant | Three months | [ |
|
|
| Cochlear implant | Five months | [ |
|
|
| Pacemaker | Two months | [ |
|
|
| Breast Implant | Two days | [ |
|
|
| Laryngeal implant | More than one year | [ |
|
|
| Internal fixation for an open proximal tibial fracture | Two months | [ |
|
|
| Pacemaker | Two years | [ |
|
|
| Plates and wire cerclages for periprosthetic fractures | Three months | [ |
|
|
| Lumbar instruments, | Seven days | [ |
|
|
| The ventricular lead of an implanted defibrillator | Eight weeks | [ |
|
|
| Hip joint | Two years | [ |
|
|
| Intravitreal ozurdex implant | Three days | [ |
|
|
| Stent graft | Three days | [ |
|
|
| Spinal instrumentation | 7–88 days | [ |
Figure 1Rethinking the interplay among device surface, host, and pathogen.
Representative reports on long-term antibacterial surfaces.
| Active Ingredients | Intended Use (Substrates) | Effective Period | Reference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Tigecycline, Copper ions | Treatment for osteomyelitis (Alginate aerogel) | 18 days | [ |
| Vancomycin | Cement (Calcium phosphate) | 168 days | [ |
| (Z-)-4-bromo-5-(bromomethylene)-2(5H)-furanone | Dental implants (Titanium) | 60 days | [ |
| Silver/Zinc ions | An orthopedic and dental implant (Titanium) | 180 days | [ |
| Nanosilver | Bone implant (Polylactic acid fiber) | 11 days | [ |
| Honokiol | Remineralization of demineralized enamel (Poly(amido amine) (PAMAM) (Dendrimer) | 24 days | [ |
| Patchouli Essential Oil | Wound Dressing (Polyvinyl alcohol and chitosan) | 2 days | [ |
| Cetylpyridinium chloride | Endodontic sealers (Polyhydroxyethyl methacrylate trimethylolpropanetrimethacrylate) | 48 days | [ |
| Metallic silver | Hard tissue replacements (Titanium) | 84 days | [ |
| Copper | Orthopedics (Titanium) | 14 days | [ |
| Zinc/Copper | Cement (dicalcium silicate) | 3 days | [ |
| Amoxicillin | Wound dressing (Poly (e-caprolactone)) | 7 days | [ |
| Chlorhexidine | Medical devices (not clear, 316L) | 3 days | [ |
| Silver ions | Orthopedic implants (Titanium) | 189 days (silver release) | [ |
| Nanosilver | Biomedicine (not clear) | 7 days | [ |
| Nanogold/Titania | Orthopedic implants (Titanium) | 6 days | [ |
| Nanosilver | Orthopedic implants (Titanium) | 60 days | [ |
| Silver nanoparticles | Orthopedic implants (Titanium) | 60 days | [ |
| Poly (poly (ethylene glycol) dimethacrylate) | Peritoneal dialysis catheters (Silicone) | 30 days | [ |
Figure 2Contact killing of silver nanoparticles synthesized and immobilized on titanium by ion implantation: (a) schematic representation of the silver plasma immersion ion implantation and deposition (Ag PIII&D) process; (b) SEM image of the silver nanoparticles synthesized and immobilized on titanium by Ag PIII&D under a 30 kV bias for 30 min; (c) cross-sectional TEM of the silver nanoparticles synthesized and immobilized on titanium by Ag PIII&D, with corresponding fast Fourier transform patterns (FFT, 1 and 2) inserted; (d) SEM image of the Staphylococcus aureus cells cultured on an Ag PIII&D treated (treated for 30 min under a 30 kV bias) titanium for 24 h at 37 °C with a bacteria concentration of 108 CFU/mL; (e) possible antibacterial mechanism of the Ag PIII&D treated titanium; (b, d, and e) reused with permission from Elsevier [143]; (c) reused with permission from American Chemical Society [144].
Figure 3Typical methods toward pH-responsive surfaces: (a) protonation of polystyrene-b-poly(4-(1-(2-(4-methylthiazol-5-yl)ethyl)-1H-1,2,3-triazol-4-yl)butyl methacrylate) (PS54-b-PTTBM23) at acidic pH levels and increase of the positive charge density on the surfaces [151]; (b) breaking the Schiff base bonds between antibacterial gentamicin and alginate dialdehyde by acidic environments [157]; (c) hydrolyzation of the hemiaminal ether linkage of antimicrobial 6-Chloropurine in 4-(1-(6-chloro-7H-purin-7-yl) ethoxy) butyl methacrylate (CPBMA) by mild acidic conditions [158]; (d) destruction of dopamine-conjugated oxidized dextran polymer to release the contained silver nanoparticles by disintegration the Schiff base structures in the polymer [160]. (a,c) reused with permission from John Wiley and Sons and American Chemical Society, respectively; (b,d) reused with permission from Elsevier.
Figure 4Silver nanoparticle decorated titanium oxide coating acting against bacterial colonization by taking advantage of extracellular electron transfer in bacteria: collection and storage of bacteria-extruded electrons on the immobilized silver nanoparticles (“bacterial charging”), accumulation of valence-band hole (h+) at the titanium oxide side of the silver–titanium oxide boundaries, and disruption of bacterial cell walls (cytosolic content leakage) by those accumulated valence-band holes (oxidation) [169]. Reused with permission from Elsevier.
Representative reports on photo-responsive antibacterial surfaces.
| Action: Active Ingredient | Light Parameter | Pathogens Tested | Intended Use | Reference |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Heat: gold | NIR light | In vitro (not specific) | [ | |
| Heat: tannic acid and iron | NIR light | Not specific | [ | |
| Heat: titanium dioxide | NIR light | Orthopedic/dental implants | [ | |
| Heat: carbon dots | Blue light |
| Not specific | [ |
| ROS: black phosphorus | Visible light | Implantable materials/device (not specific) | [ | |
| Heat and ROS: fluorescent modified red phosphorus | NIR light |
| Treatment for joint implants | [ |
| Heat and Nitric oxide: molybdenum sulfide assembled with a nitric oxide donor | NIR light | Wound repair (not specific) | [ |
Figure 5A photothermal antibacterial surface: (a) schematic illustration of the coordinated assembly of tannic acid (TA) and Fe3+ ions (iron chloride hexahydrate) on gold (can be other materials), yielding the Au-TA/Fe; (b) near-infrared (NIR) irradiation (808 nm, 2.2 W·cm−2) induced temperature changes on the material surface immersed in phosphate-buffered saline (PBS), with corresponding thermal images inserted; (c) SEM images of adherent bacteria (E. coli or MRSA) on materials surface with/without NIR irradiation (5 min), together with the typical photographs of bacterial colonies re-cultured from materials surface of different processing histories. Adapted from reference [178] with permission from the American Chemical Society.
Figure 6A photodynamic antibacterial material surface: (a) schematic illustration of the killing actions of the composite coating composed of black phosphorus nanosheets (BPS) and poly (4-pyridonemethylstyrene) (PPMS). Under light irradiation (660 nm, 0.5 W·cm−2), BPSs generate reactive oxygen species (ROS), which can directly act on bacterial cells or are stored by the coating itself through the transfer of PPMS into poly (4-pyridonemethylstyrene) endoperoxide (PPMS-EPO), yielding antibacterial activity in the dark (killing without light). (b) UV-vis spectra show the capability of ROS production in PPMS/BPS with the increasing irradiation duration in the air (20 °C, 660 nm, 0.5 W·cm−2). The insert shows the capability of ROS production by a PMMS-EPO/BPS (fabricated by illuminating the PPMS/BPS group for 40 min in presence of oxygen gas (O2) after being contained in the dark at 37 °C for 24 h. (c) 1H NMR spectra show the reversible structure change of PPMS and PPMS-EPO. Peaks corresponding to the endoperoxide ring and proton of endoperoxide were detected. Adapted from reference [181] with permission from John Wiley and Sons.
Figure 7A cell-selective titanium surface: (a) SEM surface morphology of the microbes (E. coli) cultured for 24 h on titanium doped with both calcium and silver (Ti-Ag/Ca), with a high magnification image, inserted; (b) typical morphology of rat bone marrow stem cells (BMSCs) cultured for 1 h on Ti-Ag/Ca, with a high magnification image inserted; (c,d) potential mechanism underlying the actions of Ti-Ag/Ca on microbes and mammalian cells, respectively [215]. Reused with permission from the Royal Society of Chemistry.
Figure 8An antibacterial surface targeting the adsorption of fibrinogen: the calcium released by titanium turns the intramolecular interactions between αC regions and the amino-terminal of Bβ chains, and subsequently contributes to the exposure of the antibacterial peptide in fibrinogen. The Gly-His-Arg-Pro (Gly: glycine; His: histidine; Pro: proline; Arg: arginine) are the start sequences of the antibacterial peptide Bβ15–42 which locates at the N-terminal end of the β chain [16]. Reused with permission from the Royal Society of Chemistry.
Typical flaws in our reports on antibacterial surfaces.
| Case | Antibacterial Designs | Bacterial Strain | Mammalian Cells Line | In Vivo Tests | Intended Use | Reference |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| Primary human mesenchymal stem cell (MSCs); co-culture with bacteria |
| Orthopedic implant | [ | ||
|
| Mouse | Rat femoral condyle defect model; |
| [ | ||
|
| Rabbit red blood cells (2 h- incubation); | Subcutaneous implant model in mice; |
| [ | ||
|
| Human umbilical vein endothelial cells; | Rat type I diabetes model (14 days); | Wound dressing | [ | ||
|
| Osteosarcoma cells (Saos-2, | Tumor-bearing mouse model (l | Bone implants | [ | ||
|
| E. coli (ATCC 25922); | Human gingival fibroblasts; | Subcutaneous model in rats; | Dental implant | [ | |
|
| MRSA (ATCC 43300); | MC3T3 cell; | Murine quadriceps muscle infection model (MRSA injected after scaffold placement) |
| [ | |
|
| Mice bone marrow stromal cells; | Disinfection in rats (7 days); Osteogenic property in rats (8 weeks); |
| [ |