The susceptibility of Proteus mirabilis and Enterococcus faecalis to various antimicrobial agents in polymicrobial biofilms formed using a drip flow reactor
Objectives: Interspecies interactions in poly-species biofilm are substantial. Our aim is to set up dynamic biofilm models of
___
- [1] Donlan RM, Costerton JW. Biofilms: survival mechanisms
of clinically relevant microorganisms. Clin Microbiol Rev
2002;15:167-93. doi: 10.1128/Cmr.15.2.167.193.2002
- [2] Peeters E, Nelis HJ, Coenye T. Evaluation of the efficacy of
disinfection procedures against Burkholderia cenocepacia
biofilms. J Hosp Infect 2008;70:361-8. doi: 10.1016/j.
jhin.2008.08.015.
- [3] Harriott MM, Noverr MC. Candida albicans and
Staphylococcus aureus form polymicrobial biofilms: effects
on antimicrobial resistance. Antimicrob Agents Chemother
2009;53:3914-22. doi: 10.1128/Aac.00657-09.
- [4] Armbruster CE, Mobley HLT. Merging mythology and
morphology: the multifaceted lifestyle of Proteus mirabilis.
Nat Rev Micro 2012;10:743-54. doi: 10.1038/nrmicro2890.
- [5] Armbruster CE, Smith SN, Johnson AO, et al. The pathogenic
potential of proteus mirabilis is enhanced by other
uropathogens during polymicrobial urinary tract ınfection.
Infect Immun 2017;85:e00808-16. doi:10.1128/IAI.00808-16.
- [6] Armbruster CE, Forsyth-DeOrnellas V, Johnson AO, et al.
Genome-wide transposon mutagenesis of Proteus mirabilis:
Essential genes, fitness factors for catheter-associated urinary
tract infection, and the impact of polymicrobial infection on
fitness requirements. PLoS Pathog 2017;13: e1006434. doi:
10.1371/journal.ppat.1006434.
- [7] Hidron AI, Edwards JR, Patel J, et al. NHSN annual update:
antimicrobial-resistant pathogens associated with healthcareassociated
infections: annual summary of data reported to the
National Healthcare Safety Network at the Centers for Disease
Control and Prevention, 2006–2007 Infect Control Hosp
Epidemiol 2008;29:996-1011. doi: 10.1086/591861.
- [8] Paganelli FL, Willems RJ and Leavis HL. Optimizing future
treatment of enterococcal infections: attacking the biofilm?
Trends Microbiol 2012;20:1. doi: 10.1016/j.tim.2011.11.001.
- [9] Kolenbrander PE, Palmer RJ, Periasamy S, et al. Oral
multispecies biofilm development and the key role of cellcell
distance. Nat Rev Microbiol 2010;8:471-80. doi: 10.1038/
nrmicro2381.
- [10] Burmolle M, Webb JS, Rao D, et al. Enhanced biofilm
formation and increased resistance to antimicrobial agents
and bacterial invasion are caused by synergistic interactions in
multispecies biofilms. Appl Environ Microbiol 2016;72:3916-
23. doi: 10.1128/Aem.03022-05.
- [11] Schwering M, Song J, Louie M, et al. Multi-species biofilms
defined from drinking water microorganisms provide
increased protection against chlorine disinfection. Biofouling
2013;29:917-28. doi: 10.1080/08927.014.2013.816298.
- [12] Galván EM, Mateyca C, Ielpi L. Role of interspecies
interactions in dual-species biofilms developed in vitro by
uropathogens isolated from polymicrobial urinary catheterassociated
bacteriuria. Biofouling 2016;32:1067-77. doi:
10.1080/08927.014.2016.1231300.
- [13] Peters BM, Ward RM, Rane HS, et al. Efficacy of ethanol against
Candida albicans and Staphylococcus aureus polymicrobial
biofilms. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2013;57:74-82. doi:
10.1128/Aac.01599-12.
- [14] Kart D, Tavernier S, Van Acker H, et al. Activity of disinfectants
against multispecies biofilms formed by Staphylococcus
aureus, Candida albicans and Pseudomonas aeruginosa.
Biofouling 2014;30: 377-83. doi:10.1080/08927.014.2013.878
333.
- [15] ASTM Standard E2647, 2008. Test method for quantification
of Pseudomonas aeruginosa biofilm grown using drip flow
biofilm reactor with low shear and continuous flow. ASTM
International. doi:10.1520/e2647-13.
- [16] Goeres D, Hamilton M, Beck N, et al. A method for growing
a biofilm under low shear at the air–liquid interface using
the drip flow biofilm reactor. Nat Protoc 2009;4:783-8. doi:
10.1038/nprot.2009.59.
- [17] Goeres DM, Loetterle LR, Hamilton MA, et al. Statistical
assessment of a laboratory method for growing biofilms.
Microbiology 2005;151:757-62. doi: 10.1099/mic.0.27709-0.
- [18] Wang L, Dong M, Zheng J, et al. Relationship of biofilm
formation and gelE gene expression in Enterococcus faecalis
recovered from root canals in patients requiring endodontic
retreatment. J Endod 2011;37:631-6. doi:10.1016/j.
joen.2011.02.006.
- [19] Simoes LC, Simoes M, Vieira MJ. Influence of the diversity of
bacterial isolates from drinking water on resistance of biofilms
to disinfection. Appl Environ Microbiol 2010;76:6673-9. doi:
10.1128/Aem.00872-10.
- [20] Luciano CC, Olson N, Tipple AFV, et al. Evaluation of the
ability of different detergents and disinfectants to remove
and kill organisms in traditional biofilm. Am J Infect Control
2016;44: e243-e249. doi: 10.1016/j.ajic.2016.03.040.
- [21] Perumal PK, Wand ME, Sutton JM, et al. Evaluation of the
effectiveness of hydrogen-peroxide-based disinfectants on
biofilms formed by Gram-negative pathogens. J Hosp Infect.
2014;87: 227e233. doi: 10.1016/j.jhin.2014.05.004.
- [22] Lewis K. Riddle of biofilm resistance. Antimicrob Agents
Chemother 2001;45:999-1007. doi: 10.1128/Aac.45.4.999-
1007.2001.
- [23] Anderl JN, Franklin MJ, Stewart PS. Role of antibiotic
penetration limitation in Klebsiella pneumoniae biofilm
resistance to ampicillin and ciprofloxacin. antimicrob Agents
Chemother 2000;44:1818-24. doi: 10.1128/Aac.44.7.1818-
1824.2000.
- [24] Kumon H, Tomochika K, Matunaga T, et al. A sandwich
cup method for the penetration assay of antimicrobial
agents through Pseudomonas exopolysaccharides. Microbiol
Immunol 1994;38:615-9.
- [25] Jensen ET, Kharazmi A, Lam K et al. Human
polymorphonuclear leukocyte response to Pseudomonas
aeruginosa grown in biofilms. Infect Immun 1990;58:2383-5.
- [26] Thieme L, Klinger-Strobel M, Hartung A, et al. In vitro
synergism and anti-biofilm activity of ampicillin, gentamicin,
ceftaroline and ceftriaxone against Enterococcus faecalis. J
Antimicrob Chemother 2018;73:1553-61. doi: 10.1093/jac/
dky051.
- [27] Li X, Lu N, Brady HR. Biomineralization strongly modulates
the formation of Proteus mirabilis and Pseudomonas aeruginosa
dual-species biofilms. FEMS Microbiol Ecol 2016;92:fiw189.
doi: 10.1093/femsec/fiw189.
- [28] Wasfi R, Abd El-Rahman OA, Mansour LE, et al. Antimicrobial
activities against biofilm formed by Proteus mirabilis isolates
from wound and urinary tract infections. Indian J Med
Microbiol 2012;30:76-80. doi: 10.4103/0255-0857.93044.
- [29] KwieciNska-Pirog J, Skowron K, Zniszczol K, et al. The
assessment of Proteus mirabilis susceptibility to ceftazidime
and ciprofloxacin and the impact of these antibiotics at
subinhibitory concentrations on Proteus mirabilis biofilms.
BioMed Res Int 2013;2013; 930876. doi: 10.1155/2013/930876.
- [30] Rybalchenko OV, Bondarenko VM, Orlova OG, et al.
Inhibitory effects of Lactobacillus fermentum on microbial
growth and biofilm formation, Arch Microbiol 2015;197:1027-
32. doi: 10.1007/s00203.015.1140-1.
- [31] Schwendicke F, Korte F, Drfer CE, et al. Inhibition of
Streptococcus mutans Growth and Biofilm Formation
by Probiotics in vitro. Caries Res 2017;51:87-95. doi:
10.1159/000452960.