Comparison of methods to evaluate bacterial contact-killing materials

Lagemaat, Marieke van de; Grotenhuis, Arjen; Belt-Gritter, Betsy van de; Roest, Steven; Loontjens, Ton; Busscher, Henk J.; Mei, Henny C. van der; Ren, Yijin

doi:10.1016/j.actbio.2017.06.042

Cited by 70 publications

(55 citation statements)

References 41 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Typically, in "high area to volume tests" a small volume of a microbial suspension is incubated, sandwiched between a thin cover sheet and the test sample, therewith stimulating intimate contact between the microorganisms and the sample 115 . Typical examples are the JIS-Z 2801 116 and "all in one" plating systems (e.g. for yeasts and fungi Petrifilm® Yeast and Mold all-in-one-plating systems, 3M, St. Paul, MN, USA) 117 118 .…”

Section: Methods For Testing Of Materials and Coatings That Resist Fumentioning

confidence: 99%

Methodologies for in vitro and in vivo evaluation of efficacy of antifungal and antibiofilm agents and surface coatings against fungal biofilms

Dijck¹,

Sjollema²,

Cammue³

et al. 2018

Microb Cell

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Unlike superficial fungal infections of the skin and nails, which are the most common fungal diseases in humans, invasive fungal infections carry high morbidity and mortality, particularly those associated with biofilm formation on indwelling medical devices. Therapeutic management of these complex diseases is often complicated by the rise in resistance to the commonly used antifungal agents. Therefore, the availability of accurate susceptibility testing methods for determining antifungal resistance, as well as discovery of novel antifungal and antibiofilm agents, are key priorities in medical mycology research. To direct advancements in this field, here we present an overview of the methods currently available for determining (i) the susceptibility or resistance of fungal isolates or biofilms to antifungal or antibiofilm compounds and compound combinations; (ii) the in vivo efficacy of antifungal and antibiofilm compounds and compound combinations; and (iii) the in vitro and in vivo performance of anti-infective coatings and materials to prevent fungal biofilm-based infections.

show abstract

Section: Methods For Testing Of Materials and Coatings That Resist Fumentioning

confidence: 99%

Methodologies for in vitro and in vivo evaluation of efficacy of antifungal and antibiofilm agents and surface coatings against fungal biofilms

Dijck¹,

Sjollema²,

Cammue³

et al. 2018

Microb Cell

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Adhesion-based methods, on the other hand, are suited for evaluating effectiveness of contact-killing surfaces58 ) . In a recent study, van de Lagemaat et al 59 ) found that ‘Petrifilm system’ and ‘Japanese Industrial Standard (JIS Z 2801)’ were the best methods to assess the antimicrobial activity of contact-killing surfaces, if they were used with a complementary assay (zone of inhibition on agar) to exclude bacterial death due to the release of active compound in the medium. Although the JIS Z 2801 has also been adopted as an International Organization for Standardization procedure (ISO 22196:2011), it is a questionable method, in certain respects.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Nanomaterials as a new opportunity for protecting workers from biological risk

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Healthcare-Associated Infections (HAIs) represent a frequent complication for hospitalized patients and more rarely for workers. In recent years, substantial scientific evidence has been reached regarding the role played by the inanimate surfaces, especially those touched in patient-care areas, in the transmission of nosocomial pathogens. Therefore, it is essential to find new collective protective measures to minimize microbial contamination in healthcare facilities, thereby preventing the spread of multi-drug resistant bacteria. We present an overview of the major nano-enabled AntiMicrobial Coatings (AMCs) which may be used as collective protective measures in healthcare setting, discussing also some aspects related to their effectiveness and safety. AMCs may be classified within three groups on base of their mechanism of action: surfaces releasing active compound, contact-killing surfaces and anti-adhesive surfaces. To date, little information is available on the effectiveness of AMCs to reduce the risk of HAIs since the most of studies do not reach conclusive results on their beneficial effects. Moreover, the lack of standard protocols for assessing antimicrobial efficacy and poor data about the interaction between AMCs and disinfectants prevent their placing on the market. Further studies are needed for assessing risks and benefits of AMCs as collective protective measures in healthcare setting.

show abstract

“…In the analysis of the efficacy of antimicrobial coatings and materials mostly cultivation-dependent methods have been used, even though depending on the selected cultivation-dependent method, high variations in antimicrobial efficacy can be obtained for the same material ( van de Lagemaat et al, 2017 ). For example, mechanical removal of surface-attached bacteria can potentially lead to release of the antimicrobials, making cultivation-dependent analysis unreliable.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Extraction of Biofilms From Ureteral Stents for Quantification and Cultivation-Dependent and -Independent Analyses

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Ureteral stenting is a common surgical procedure, which is associated with a high morbidity and economic burden, but the knowledge on the link between biofilms on these stents, morbidity, and the impact of the involved microbiota is still limited. This is partially due to a lack of methods that allow for a controlled extraction of the biofilms from stents. Development of an appropriate in vitro model to assess prevention of biofilm formation by antimicrobial coatings and biomaterials requires a profound understanding of the biofilm composition, including the involved microbiota. This work describes an analytical pipeline for the extraction of native biofilms from ureteral stents for both cultivation-dependent and -independent analysis, involving a novel mechanical abrasion method of passing stent samples through a tapered pinhole. The efficiency of this novel method was evaluated by quantifying the removed biofilm mass, numbers of cultivable bacteria, calcium content, and microscopic stent analysis after biofilm removal using 30 clinical stent samples. Furthermore, the extraction of in vitro formed Escherichia coli biofilms was evaluated by universal 16S quantitative PCR, a cultivation-independent method to demonstrate efficient biofilm removal by the new approach. The novel method enables effective contamination-free extraction of the biofilms formed on ureteral stents and their subsequent quantification, and it represents a useful tool for comprehensive examinations of biofilms on ureteral stents.

show abstract

Comparison of methods to evaluate bacterial contact-killing materials

Cited by 70 publications

References 41 publications

Methodologies for in vitro and in vivo evaluation of efficacy of antifungal and antibiofilm agents and surface coatings against fungal biofilms

Methodologies for in vitro and in vivo evaluation of efficacy of antifungal and antibiofilm agents and surface coatings against fungal biofilms

Nanomaterials as a new opportunity for protecting workers from biological risk

Extraction of Biofilms From Ureteral Stents for Quantification and Cultivation-Dependent and -Independent Analyses

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About