How Bacteria Stick

Costerton, J. W.; Geesey, Gill G.; Cheng, K.-J.

doi:10.1038/scientificamerican0178-86

Cited by 1,238 publications

(645 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

608

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…[1] Although seemingly trivial at that time, this discovery has had a profound impact on our understanding of the pathogenesis and treatment of bacterial infections. [2][3][4][5] Today, treating biofilm infections is one of the major challenges the medical community is facing and is expected to remain so for many years to come.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Lipid and polymer nanoparticles for drug delivery to bacterial biofilms

Forier

Raemdonck

Smedt

et al. 2014

Journal of Controlled Release

356

320

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Biofilms are matrix-enclosed communities of bacteria that show increased antibiotic resistance and the capability to evade the immune system. They can cause recalcitrant infections which cannot be cured with classical antibiotic therapy. Drug delivery by lipid or polymer nanoparticles is considered a promising strategy for overcoming biofilm resistance. These particles are able to improve the delivery of antibiotics to the bacterial cells, thereby increasing the efficacy of the treatment. In this review we give an overview of the types of polymer and lipid nanoparticles that have been developed for this purpose. The antimicrobial activity of nanoparticle encapsulated antibiotics compared to the activity of the free antibiotic is discussed in detail. In addition, targeting and triggered drug release strategies to further improve the antimicrobial activity are reviewed. Finally, ample attention is given to advanced microscopy methods that shed light on the behavior of nanoparticles inside biofilms, allowing further optimization of the nanoformulations. Lipid and polymer nanoparticles were found to increase the antimicrobial efficacy in many cases. Strategies such as the use of fusogenic liposomes, targeting of the nanoparticles and triggered release of the antimicrobial agent ensured the delivery of the antimicrobial agent in close proximity of the bacterial cells, maximizing the exposure of the biofilm to the antimicrobial agent. The majority of the discussed papers still present data on the in vitro anti-biofilm activity of nanoformulations, indicating that there is an urgent need for more in vivo studies in this field.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Lipid and polymer nanoparticles for drug delivery to bacterial biofilms

Forier

Raemdonck

Smedt

et al. 2014

Journal of Controlled Release

356

320

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…John William (Bill) Costerton changed this perception in the late 1970s when he observed surface associated microbial aggregates enclosed within a matrix of extracellular material, a phenomena he later termed 'biofilm' [1,2]. Today, the biofilm phenotype has been identified in up to 80% of all non-acute infections, including foreign-body related, otitis media, orthopaedic, catheter, chronic wounds and lung-related infections [3][4][5][6][7].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Limitations of In Vitro Experimentation in Understanding Biofilms and Chronic Infection

Roberts

Kragh

Bjarnsholt

et al. 2015

Journal of Molecular Biology

168

153

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We have become increasingly aware that during infection, pathogenic bacteria often grow in multicellular biofilms which are often highly resistant to antibacterial strategies. In order to understand how biofilms form and contribute to infection, in vitro biofilm systems such as microtitre plate assays and flow cells, have been heavily used by many research groups around the world. Whilst these methods have greatly increased our understanding of the biology of biofilms, it is becoming increasingly apparent that many of our in vitro methods do not accurately represent in vivo conditions. Here we present a systematic review of the most widely used in vitro biofilm systems, and we discuss why they are not always representative of the in vivo biofilms found in chronic infections. We present examples of methods that will help us to bridge the gap between in vitro and in vivo biofilm work, so that our bench-side data can ultimately be used to improve bedside treatment.

show abstract

“…12 Survival advantages conferred by the biofilm community include resistance to being swept away by simple shear forces, resistance to phagocytosis, and resistance to antimicrobial agents. 1,2 For example, in a rabbit model of CAUTI, 400 mg/kg of amdinocillin was required to eliminate Escherichia coli from the surface of the urinary catheter, although the minimum inhibitory concentration of amdinocillin against this organism in the planktonic state was 0.5 μg/mL. 13 Because several studies show that antibiotics can penetrate mature biofilms thoroughly, [14][15][16] the slow growth rates of organisms in biofilms is probably the major factor in conferring resistance.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Role of biofilm in catheter-associated urinary tract infection☆

Trautner

Darouiche

2004

American Journal of Infection Control

351

263

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The predominant form of life for the majority of microorganisms in any hydrated biologic system is a cooperative community termed a "biofilm." A biofilm on an indwelling urinary catheter consists of adherent microorganisms, their extracellular products, and host components deposited on the catheter. The biofilm mode of life conveys a survival advantage to the microorganisms associated with it and, thus, biofilm on urinary catheters results in persistent infections that are resistant to antimicrobial therapy. Because chronic catheterization leads almost inevitably to bacteriuria, routine treatment of asymptomatic bacteriuria in persons who are catheterized is not recommended. When symptoms of a urinary tract infection develop in a person who is catheterized, changing the catheter before collecting urine improves the accuracy of urine culture results. Changing the catheter may also improve the response to antibiotic therapy by removing the biofilm that probably contains the infecting organisms and that can serve as a nidus for reinfection. Currently, no proven effective strategies exist for prevention of catheter-associated urinary tract infection in persons who are chronically catheterized.Health care providers have traditionally envisioned bacteria in their free-floating or planktonic state, and planktonic organisms have been the focus of traditional microbiologic methods of sampling and culture. 1 However, the predominant form of life for the majority of microorganisms in any hydrated biologic system, such as the human body, is a cooperative community termed a "biofilm." 2 A formal definition of biofilm includes 3 components: (1) adherence of the microorganisms, either to a surface or to each other; (2) a change in gene expression resulting in a different phenotype from the planktonic state; and (3) an extracellular matrix composed of host components and secreted bacterial products. 3,4 A functional definition of biofilm also includes the fact that biofilm results in chronic, persistent infections that are difficult to eradicate with antimicrobial therapy. 5 The relevance of biofilm to catheter-associated urinary tract infection (UTI) (CAU-TI) is that a foreign body, such as an indwelling urethral catheter, connecting a normally sterile, hydrated body site to the outside world will inevitably become colonized with microorganisms. 4 Thus, the central character in the story of CAUTI is really the biofilm on the urinary catheter. PATHOGENESIS OF URINARY CATHETER-ASSOCIATED BIOFILMThe pathogenesis of CAUTI is related to the susceptibility of inert catheter material to microbial colonization. On the surface of normal bladder mucosa, binding of bacteria triggers an NIH-PA Author ManuscriptNIH-PA Author Manuscript NIH-PA Author Manuscript inflammatory response that results in an influx of neutrophils and sloughing of epithelial cells with bound bacteria. [6][7][8][9] Both processes contribute to clearance of the bacteria from the mucosal surface. In contrast, catheter surfaces have no inherent defense mechani...

show abstract

How Bacteria Stick

Cited by 1,238 publications

References 0 publications

Lipid and polymer nanoparticles for drug delivery to bacterial biofilms

Lipid and polymer nanoparticles for drug delivery to bacterial biofilms

The Limitations of In Vitro Experimentation in Understanding Biofilms and Chronic Infection

Role of biofilm in catheter-associated urinary tract infection☆

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About