Investigation of Antibacterial Activity and Biofilm Formation of Silicones Coated With Minocycline-Rifampicin, Silver Nitrate, and Nitrofurantoin for Short-term Utilization in In Vitro Urinary System Models
“…Antimicrobial efficiency refers to an evaluation of the ability of the active substrate to decrease bacteria population over time. Most in vitro antimicrobial tests use a static “closed” testing system,[9b,34b,42] whereas in vivo the implant has to face a dynamic, continuously changing, mechanically unstable, and predominantly fluid environment. [9b,12,34a,43] To date, there is no widely accepted methodology available to precisely and reproducibly evaluate the antimicrobial efficiency of new nano‐based solutions proposed for antimicrobial surfaces .…”
Section: Key Features For the Design Of Efficient Antimicrobial Surfacesmentioning
Microbial contamination and biofilm formation of medical devices is a major issue associated with medical complications and increased costs. Consequently, there is a growing need for novel strategies and exploitation of nanoscience‐based technologies to reduce the interaction of bacteria and microbes with synthetic surfaces. This article focuses on surfaces that are nanostructured, have functional coatings, and generate or release antimicrobial compounds, including “smart surfaces” producing antibiotics on demand. Key requirements for successful antimicrobial surfaces including biocompatibility, mechanical stability, durability, and efficiency are discussed and illustrated with examples of the recent literature. Various nanoscience‐based technologies are described along with new concepts, their advantages, and remaining open questions. Although at an early stage of research, nanoscience‐based strategies for creating antimicrobial surfaces have the advantage of acting at the molecular level, potentially making them more efficient under specific conditions. Moreover, the interface can be fine tuned and specific interactions that depend on the location of the device can be addressed. Finally, remaining important challenges are identified: improvement of the efficacy for long‐term use, extension of the application range to a large spectrum of bacteria, standardized evaluation assays, and combination of passive and active approaches in a single surface to produce multifunctional surfaces.
“…Antimicrobial efficiency refers to an evaluation of the ability of the active substrate to decrease bacteria population over time. Most in vitro antimicrobial tests use a static “closed” testing system,[9b,34b,42] whereas in vivo the implant has to face a dynamic, continuously changing, mechanically unstable, and predominantly fluid environment. [9b,12,34a,43] To date, there is no widely accepted methodology available to precisely and reproducibly evaluate the antimicrobial efficiency of new nano‐based solutions proposed for antimicrobial surfaces .…”
Section: Key Features For the Design Of Efficient Antimicrobial Surfacesmentioning
Microbial contamination and biofilm formation of medical devices is a major issue associated with medical complications and increased costs. Consequently, there is a growing need for novel strategies and exploitation of nanoscience‐based technologies to reduce the interaction of bacteria and microbes with synthetic surfaces. This article focuses on surfaces that are nanostructured, have functional coatings, and generate or release antimicrobial compounds, including “smart surfaces” producing antibiotics on demand. Key requirements for successful antimicrobial surfaces including biocompatibility, mechanical stability, durability, and efficiency are discussed and illustrated with examples of the recent literature. Various nanoscience‐based technologies are described along with new concepts, their advantages, and remaining open questions. Although at an early stage of research, nanoscience‐based strategies for creating antimicrobial surfaces have the advantage of acting at the molecular level, potentially making them more efficient under specific conditions. Moreover, the interface can be fine tuned and specific interactions that depend on the location of the device can be addressed. Finally, remaining important challenges are identified: improvement of the efficacy for long‐term use, extension of the application range to a large spectrum of bacteria, standardized evaluation assays, and combination of passive and active approaches in a single surface to produce multifunctional surfaces.
“…Biofilm formation on the surface of Foley catheters is the major cause of bacteriuria. The biofilm layer formed by bacteria attached to the urinary catheter surface is the major challenging problem for treatment of CAUTIs ( 6 , 14 , 15 ). In our study, the biofilm forming ability of E. faecalis isolates in microtiter plates was analysed both by CV staining and plate counting assay.…”
Background:Enterococcus faecalis, Escherichia coli, Staphylococcus epidermidis, Pseudomonas aeruginosa and Candida albicans biofilms are major causes of catheter-associated urinary tract infections. Antimicrobial-coated or impregnated urinary catheters are seen as a possible way to prevent these infections.Aims:To determine the biofilm-forming ability of 89 E. faecalis isolates from urinary tract infections and to compare several urinary catheters for antimicrobial durability and the inhibitory effects on biofilm formation of different laboratory strains and clinical isolates of E. faecalis.Study Design:In vitro experimental study.Methods:The biofilm forming ability of E. faecalis isolates was determined by the crystal violet staining and plate counting methods. For comparison of urinary catheters, biofilms of 45 E. faecalis isolates from the catheter samples of hospitalized patients and five laboratory strains of E. coli ATCC25922, S. epidermidis ATCC35984, P. aeruginosa ATCC27853, E. faecalis ATCC29212 and C. albicans ATCC90028 were formed on the catheters in 24-well tissue culture plates. Scanning electron microscopy analysis was performed to observe biofilms.Results:All 89 E. faecalis isolates were found to be biofilm positive. Nitrofurazone-impregnated catheters significantly reduced the cell counts of E. faecalis isolates and completely inhibited the formation of P. aeruginosa and S. epidermidis biofilms compared with the others. Regarding reduction of biofilm cell counts, a hydrophilic-coated catheter was more effective against P. aeruginosa, whereas a silver-coated catheter was found to be more effective against S. epidermidis. The nitrofurazone-impregnated catheter had the best antimicrobial durability.Conclusion:Urine isolates of E. faecalis had considerable ability with respect to biofilm formation. The nitrofurazone-impregnated catheter was the most effective against all tested bacteria; however, the effect of a hydrophilic or silver-coated catheter depends on the species present in it.
“…This was complemented by the work of Jaap et al . and Salvarci et al., who included gentamicin, teicoplanin, and vancomycin ( 3 ). Copolymeric silicones grafted with hydrogel polyvinylpyrrolidone show an enhancement in antibacterial activity compared with homopolymeric silicone elastomers; Nablo et al .…”
Section: Preparation Of Silicones With Antimicrobial Activitymentioning
confidence: 93%
“…Li et al [13] prepared antibiotic-coated siliconesw ith rifampin/ minocycline (1), amikacin (2), and vancomycin (3). They were coatedw ith both neat and gelatin-modified silicone by dipping, then sterilized with ethylene oxide.T his was complementedb yt he work of Jaap et al [14] and Salvarcie tal., [15] who included gentamicin, teicoplanin, and vancomycin( 3). Copolymeric silicones grafted with hydrogel polyvinylpyrrolidone show an enhancement in antibacterial activity compared with homopolymeric silicone elastomers;N ablo et al [16] developed nitric oxide (NO)-releasing xerogel coatings that were overlaid onto silicone by solidification.…”
Section: Layer-by-layermentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Hydrosilylation is often used for the functionalization of silicones that contain either SiÀHo rv inyl functionalities. Mizerska et al [49] developedQ AS from imidazoles (15), whereas Chen et al [50] reported N-halamine polysiloxane (16), both of which are made from polymethylhydrosiloxane (PMHS). Later,C hen et al developed polysiloxanes with pendant pyridinium compounds (17).…”
This Focus Review describes state-of-the-art methods for the preparation of antimicrobials ilicones. Given the diversity of antimicrobiala ctivity and their mechanisms, the performance of these materials is highly dependento nt he characteristics of the polymeric matrix. Therefore, different synthetic routes have been developed, such as 1) physical treatments,2 )chemical transformations, and 3) copolymerization. This classification is not exclusive,s os ome products belong to more than one class. Herein, we attemptt op resent ah andy overview of the development of antimicrobial silicones, their most important application fields, the most relevant antimicrobiala ssays,a nd, as the title suggests, an overview of the most relevant preparation methods.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.