In vitro antibacterial activity of bioactive glass S53P4 on multiresistant pathogens causing osteomyelitis and prosthetic joint infection

Cunha, Mateus Trinconi; Murça, Maria Aparecida Soares; Nigro, Stanley; Klautau, Giselle Burlamaqui; Salles, Mauro José Costa

doi:10.1186/s12879-018-3069-x

Cited by 28 publications

(19 citation statements)

References 32 publications

(46 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Stress application in various forms has been shown to result in cell-size loss in the manner of SCVs in S. aureus [28]. In conclusion, BAG granules demonstrated comparable effects on biofilm to those of various nanoparticles previously described in the cited literature [19,20]. The similarity in effect of these substances may correlate to their ability to induce cellular stress.…”

Section: Platinum -S53p4supporting

confidence: 55%

“…Oxidative stress caused by BAG has been shown to inhibit fungal growth, biofilm formation as well as dimorphism of the yeast Candida albicans [19]. Growth inhibiting effects have also been detected against S. aureus and P. aeruginosa [20]. A comparable effect of ferric oxide and chitosan-coated silver nanoparticles against various bacteria, e.g.…”

Section: Platinum -S53p4mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Imaging studies of bacterial biofilms on cochlear implants—Bioactive glass (BAG) inhibits mature biofilm

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The capability of Pseudomonas aeruginosa and Staphylococcus aureus to form biofilm on varying CI component materials differs in the presence and absence of bioactive glass (BAG). The application of BAG induces significant changes in biofilm morphology which can be visualized via scanning electron microscopy (SEM). Bacterial biofilm formation on medical devices, such as cochlear implants (CI), can lead to chronic infections. Interestingly, BAG of type S53P4 seems to be a promising tool for use in the reduction of biofilm development. Primarily, four bacterial species known to cause implant-related infections, P.aeruginosa (ATCC9027), S. aureus (ATCC6538), Staphylococcus epidermidis (ATCC12228) and Streptococcus pyogenes (ATCC19615) were analyzed regarding their capacity to form biofilm on CI components manufactured from three kinds of material: silicone, platinum and titanium. Subsequently, P. aeruginosa and S. aureus biofilms were visualized using scanning electron microscopy, comparing BAG-treated biofilm with non-treated biofilm. The four bacterial species presented biofilm-forming capabilities in a species and surface dependent manner. Metal CI components allowed for the greatest proliferation of biofilm. S. aureus and P. aeruginosa showed the highest rate of biofilm formation on polystyrene surfaces. For both species, SEM revealed altered biofilm morphology after treatment of S53P4 BAG. This study indicates that bacterial biofilm formation and structure on CI components is dependent on the surface composition, altering between metal and silicone surfaces. After application of BAG, changes in biofilm morphology on CI components were observed. These data highlight the impact of BAG on bacterial biofilm morphology.

show abstract

Section: Platinum -S53p4supporting

confidence: 55%

Section: Platinum -S53p4mentioning

confidence: 99%

Imaging studies of bacterial biofilms on cochlear implants—Bioactive glass (BAG) inhibits mature biofilm

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In that particular trial, the BG showed similar activity as calcium sulfate antibiotic beads; however, it must be noted that both groups of patients received systemic antibiotic for 6–12 weeks as part of the trial, casting doubt on the efficacy of BG as a standalone antimicrobial material [ 15 ]. In recent times, S53P4 BG garnered much attention for its antibacterial property and showed so in in vitro studies [ 51 ]. Although clinical study did not use local antibiotic when S53P4 BG was used as a bone graft substitute to treat osteomyelitis, patients received systemic antibiotic for 4 to 6 weeks postoperatively [ 52 ].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Bioglass-Based Antibiotic (Vancomycin) Releasing Bone Void Filling Putty to Treat Osteomyelitis and Aid Bone Healing

Hasan

Schaner

Mulinti

et al. 2021

IJMS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

While the infection rate after primary total joint replacements (TJR) sits at 1–2%, for trauma-related surgery, it can be as high as 3.6 to 21.2% based on the type of trauma; the risk of reinfection after revision surgery is even higher. Current treatments with antibiotic-releasing PMMA-based bone cement/ beads and/or systemic antibiotic after surgical debridement do not provide effective treatment due to fluctuating antibiotic levels at the site of infection, leading to insufficient local antibiotic concentration. In addition, non-biodegradable PMMA does not support bone regrowth in the debrided void spaces and often must be removed in an additional surgery. Here, we report a bioactive glass or bioglass (BG) substrate-based biodegradable, easy to fabricate “press fitting” antibiotic-releasing bone void filling (ABVF-BG) putty to provide effective local antibiotic release at the site of infection along with support for bone regeneration. The ABVF-BG putty formulation had homogenously distributed BG particles, a porous structure, and showed putty-like ease of handling. Furthermore, the ABVF-BG putty demonstrated in vitro antibacterial activity for up to 6 weeks. Finally, the ABVF-BG putty was biodegradable in vivo and showed 100% bacterial eradication (as shown by bacterial cell counts) in the treatment group, which received ABVF-BG putty, compared to the infection control group, where all the rats had a high bacterial load (4.63 × 106 ± 7.9 × 105 CFU/gram bone) and sustained osteomyelitis. The ABVF-BG putty also supported bone growth in the void space as indicated by a combination of histology, µCT, and X-ray imaging. The potential for simultaneous infection treatment and bone healing using the developed BG-based ABVF-BG putty is promising as an alternative treatment option for osteomyelitis.

show abstract

“…Bone reconstruction is necessary after successful infection control. Autologous bone graft is the gold standard and has osteogenic, osteoinductive, and osteoconductive properties (Ferguson et al, 2017;Calori et al, 2011;De Long et al, 2007;Egol et al, 2015). However, the volume that can be achieved is limited, and donor site morbidity is considerable (Pape et al, 2010).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Bioactive glass S53P4 vs. autologous bone graft for filling defects in patients with chronic osteomyelitis and infected non-unions – a single center experience

Steinhausen

Lefering

Glombitza

et al. 2021

J. Bone Joint Infect.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. Introduction: The goals of osteomyelitis therapy are successful control of infection and reconstruction of the bone. The gold standard for filling defects is the autologous bone graft. Bioactive glass S53P4 is an inorganic bone substitute. We compared the outcome of using bioactive glass (BAG) versus autologous bone graft (AB) in patients with infected non-union. Methods: Patients with chronic osteomyelitis and infected non-union who received either bioactive glass or autologous bone grafts between 2013 and 2017 were analyzed retrospectively. The primary endpoint was successful control of infection during follow-up. Secondary endpoints were bone healing, functional outcome, and occurrence of complications. Results: Eighty-three patients were analyzed (BAG n=51, AB n=32). Twenty-one patients experienced reinfection (BAG n=15, 29 %; AB n=6, 19 %). Seventy-eight patients achieved full weight bearing (BAG n=47, 92 %; AB n=31, 97 %). Sixty-four patients had complete bone healing at the end of the follow-up period (BAG n=39, 77 %; AB n=25, 78 %). There were no significant differences between the groups with respect to the primary or secondary endpoints. Patients with multidrug-resistant pathogens had a significantly higher rate of incomplete bone healing (p=0.033) and a 3-fold higher risk of complications in both groups. Conclusions: Bioactive glass appears to be a suitable bone substitute not only for successful control of infection and defect filling but also for bone healing in cases of infected non-union. In our study, bioactive glass was neither superior nor inferior to autologous bone graft with regard to the primary and secondary endpoints. Further studies with larger numbers of patients are required.

show abstract

In vitro antibacterial activity of bioactive glass S53P4 on multiresistant pathogens causing osteomyelitis and prosthetic joint infection

Cited by 28 publications

References 32 publications

Imaging studies of bacterial biofilms on cochlear implants—Bioactive glass (BAG) inhibits mature biofilm

Imaging studies of bacterial biofilms on cochlear implants—Bioactive glass (BAG) inhibits mature biofilm

A Bioglass-Based Antibiotic (Vancomycin) Releasing Bone Void Filling Putty to Treat Osteomyelitis and Aid Bone Healing

Bioactive glass S53P4 vs. autologous bone graft for filling defects in patients with chronic osteomyelitis and infected non-unions – a single center experience

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About