Sahra KIRMUSAOĞLU, Seyhun YURDUGÜL, Esra KOÇOĞLU

Effects of fermented sumach on the formation of slime layer of staphylococcus aureus

Giriş: S. aureus hastanelerde çok yaygın olarak izole edilen patojen bakterilerden biridir ve nozokomiyal enfeksiyonların en sık sebebidir. Biyofilm oluşumu ile ilişkili nozokomiyal stafilokok yabancı cisim enfeksiyonları ciddi tehdittir ve yeni tedavi ile önleyici stratejiler gerektirir. İntravenöz kateterlerin implantasyonu, prostetik implantların cerrahi implantasyonu enfeksiyon riski taşır. Biyofilmlerin tüm bu etkilerini önleyebilmek için sumağın S. aureus biyofilm oluşumu üzerinde olası antibakteriyel etkilerini gözlemlemek için bu çalışma tasarlandı. Gereç ve Yöntem: Sumağın çeşitli konsantrasyonlarının 13 Staphylococcus aureus suşunun biyofilm oluşumuna etkisi mikroelisa yöntemiyle test edildi. Bulgular: Dört metisilin dirençli Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) ve dokuz metisilin duyarlı Staphylococcus aureus’ta (MSSA) sumağın değişik konsantrasyonları (0.1, 0.2, 0.5 ve 1.0 µl/ml) arasında anlamlı farklılıklar gözlendi (p < 0.05). Bakterilerin tümünde stafilokok enfeksiyonlarında önemli bir virülans faktörü olan slime üretiminde dozla ilişkili azalma gözlendi. Sonuç: Çalışmamızda, sumağın 0.1, 0.2, 0.5 ve 1.0 µl/ml konsantrasyonlarında 13 suşun biyofilm üretimi sırasıyla 17%, 22%, 28% ve 48% azaldı. Bitkisel bir ürün olan sumağın özellikle MRSA olmak üzere stafilokok enfeksiyonlarında önemli bir virülans faktörü olan biyofilm üretimini azaltabildiği sonucu çıkarılabilir.

Staphylococcus aureus’un biyofilm tabakasının oluşumunda sumağın etkisi

Objective: Staphylococcus aureus (S. aureus) is one of the most commonly isolated bacterial pathogens in hospitals, and the most frequent cause of nosocomial infections. Nosocomial staphylococcal foreign-body infections related to biofilm formation are a serious threat, demanding new therapeutic and preventive strategies. Implantation of intravenous catheters and surgical implantation of prosthetic implants carry a risk of infection. In order to prevent all these effects of biofilms, a study was designed to observe the possible antibacterial effect of sumach (Rhus coriaria) on the biofilm formation of S. aureus. Material and Methods: The influence of varying concentrations of sumach on the formation of biofilms by 13 strains of Staphylococcus aureus was tested by a microelisa assay. Results: The significant differences between varying concentrations of sumach (0.1, 0.2, 0.5 and 1.0 μl/ml) were observed in four methicillin resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) and nine methicillin sensitive Staphylococcus aureus (MSSA) (p

PDF

___

1. Harbarth S, Masuet-Aumatell C, Schrenzel J, Francois P, Akakpo C, Renzi G, et al. Evaluation of rapid screening and pre-emptive contact isolation for detecting and controlling methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus in critical care: an interventional cohort study. Critical Care 2006;10:R25. [CrossRef]
2. Kluytmans J. Control of meticillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) and the value of rapid tests. Journal of Hospital Infection 2007; 65 Suppl 2:100-4. [CrossRef]
3. Livermore DM. Antibiotic resistance in staphylococci. Int J Antimicrob Agents 2000;16 Suppl 1:S3-10. [CrossRef]
4. Vuong C, Otto M. Staphylococcus epidermidis infections. Microbes Infect 2002;4:481-9. [CrossRef]
5. von Eiff C, Heilmann C, Herrmann M, Peters G. Basic aspects of the pathogenesis of staphylococcal polymer-associated infections. Infection 1999;27 Suppl 1:S7-10. [CrossRef]
6. Darouiche, RO. Treatment of infections associated with surgical implants. N Engl J Med 2004;350:1422-9. [CrossRef]
7. Costerton JW, Montanaro L, Arciola CR. Biofilm in implant infections: its production and regulation. Int J Artif Organs 2005;28:1062-8.
8. Dunne WM, Jr, Mason EO Jr, Kaplan SL. Diffusion of rifampin and vancomycin through a Staphylococcus epidermidis biofilm. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1993;37:2522-6.
9. Fluit AC, Wielders CLC, Verhoef J, Schmitz FJ. Epidemiology and susceptibility of 3,051 Staphylococcus aureus isolates from 25 university hospitals participating in the European SENTRY Study. J Clin Microbiol 2001;39:3727-32. [CrossRef]
10. Adwan K, Abu-Hasan N, Adwan G, Jarrar N, Abu-Shanab B, Abu-Zant A. Nosocomial infection caused by methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus in Palestine. Microb Drug Resist 2005;11:75-7. [CrossRef]
11. Fridkin SK, Hageman JC, Morrison M, Sanza LT, Como-Sabetti K, Jernigan JA, et al. Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus disease in three communities. N Engl J Med 2005;352:1436-44. [CrossRef]
12. Schito GC. The importance of the development of antibiotic resistance in Staphylococcus aureus. Clin Microbiol Infect 2006;12 Suppl 1:3-8. [CrossRef]
13. Blatnik J, Lesnicar G. Propagation of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus due to the overloading of medical nurses in intensive care units. J Hosp Infect 2006;63:162-6. [CrossRef]
14. Saxena G, McCutcheon AR, Farmer S, Towers GHN, Hancock REW. Antimicrobial constituents of Rhus glabra. J Ethnopharmacology 1994;42:95-9. [CrossRef]
15. McCutcheon AR, Ellis SM, Hancock RE, Towers GH. Antifungal screening of medicinal plants of British Columbian native peoples. J Ethnopharmacology 1994;44:157-69. [CrossRef]
16. Chung KT, Wong TY, Wei CI, Huang YW, Lin Y. Tannins and human health: a review. Crit Rev Food Sci Nutr 1998;38:421-64. [CrossRef]
17. Nasar-Abbas SM, Halkman AK. Antimicrobial effect of water extract of sumac (Rhus coriaria L.) on the growth of some food borne bacteria including pathogens. Int J Food Microbiol 2004;97:63-9. [CrossRef]
18. Booth IR, Kroll RG. The preservation of foods by low pH, In G. W. Gould (ed.). Mechanisms of action of food preservation procedures. Elsevier Science Publishers, New York, N.Y; 1989. p. 119-60.
19. Stradford M, Anslow PA. Evidence that sorbic acid does not inhibit yeast as a classic ‘weak acid preservative’. Lett Appl Microbiol 1998;27:203-6.
20. Brul S, Coote P. Preservative agents in foods. Mode of action and microbial resistance mechanism. Int J Food Microbiol 1999;50: 1-17. [CrossRef]
21. Freeman DJ, Falkiner FR, Keane CT. New method for detecting slime production by coagulase negative staphylococci. J Clin Pathol 1989;42:872-4. [CrossRef]
22. Christensen GD, Simpson WA, Younger JJ, Baddour LM, Barrett FF, Melton DM, et al. Adherence of coagulase-negative staphylococci to plastic tissue culture plates: a quantitative model for the adherence of staphylococci to medical devices. J Clin Microbiol 1985;22:996-1006.
23. Pérez-Giraldo C, Rodríguez-Benito A, Morán FJ, Hurtado C, Blanco MT, Gómez-García AC. Influence of N-acetylcysteine on the formation of biofilm by Staphylococcus epidermidis. J Antimicrob Chemother 1997;39:643-6. [CrossRef]
24. Büyüktuna SA, Turhan Ö, Cengiz M, Ramazanoğlu A, Yalçın AN. Nosocomial Infections and Agents Determined by Consultations in Intensive Care Unit. Balkan Med J 2010;27:150-5.
25. Brumfitt W, Hamiltton-Miller J. Methicillin resistant Staphylococcus aureus. N Engl J Med 1989;320:1188-96. [CrossRef]
26. Flowers RH 3rd, Schwenzer KJ, Kopel RF, Fisch MJ, Tucker SI, Farr BM. Efficacy of an attachable subcutaneous cuff for the prevention of intravascular catheter-related infection. A randomized controlled trial. JAMA 1989;261:878-83. [CrossRef]
27. Farber BF, Wolff AG. The use of nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs to prevent adherence of Staphylococcus epidermidis to medical polymers. J Infect Dis 1992;166:861-5. [CrossRef]
28. Percival SL, Kite P, Eastwood K, Murga R, Carr J, Arduino MJ, et al. Tetrasodium EDTA as a novel central venous catheter lock solution against biofilm. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2005;26:515-7. [CrossRef]
29. Yakandawala N, Gawande PV, LoVetri K, Madhyastha S. Effect of ovotransferrin, protamine sulfate and EDTA combination on biofilm formation by catheter-associated bacteria. J Appl Microbiol 2007;102:722-7. [CrossRef]
30. Juda M, Paprota K, Jałoza D, Malm A, Rybojad P, Gozdziuk K. EDTA as a potential agent preventing formation of Staphylococcus epidermidis biofilm on polichloride vinyl biomaterials. Ann Agric Environ Med 2008;15:237-41.