Wound care antiseptics - performance differences against Staphylococcus aureus in biofilm

Acta Veterinaria Scandinavica

Lene K Vestby¹  Live L Nesse¹ 

[1] Department of Laboratory Services, Section for Bacteriology - Aquatic and Terrestrial, Norwegian Veterinary Institute, Ullevålsveien 68, Pb 750 Sentrum, Oslo, N-0106, Norway

关键词: Iodine;    QAC;    Biguanide;    Wounds;    Antiseptics;    Staphylococcus;    Biofilm;   

Others  :  1205850
DOI  :  10.1186/s13028-015-0111-5

 received in 2014-11-11, accepted in 2015-04-15,  发布年份 2015

【 摘 要 】

Background

Staphylococcus aureus is commonly isolated from infected wounds both in animals and humans. It is known to be an excellent biofilm former and biofilms are present in as many as 60% of chronic wounds. Despite that the presence of biofilms in infections are common, antiseptics are usually qualified for in vivo testing according to their effect on planktonic cells. As it is well known that bacteria in biofilms are more tolerant to antiseptics than planktonic bacteria, biofilm infections can be difficult to treat. The aim of the study was to compare three different categories of antiseptics, biguanide (chlorhexidine), quaternary ammonium compound (QAC; Pyrisept) and iodine/iodophores (2% iodine liniment), with regards to efficacy in killing S. aureus in biofilm. If there was observed a difference in efficacy between these antiseptics, a second aim was to find the most effective of the three antiseptics.

Results

Large differences in the bactericidal effect of the different antiseptics against S. aureus in biofilm were observed in the present study. Iodine treatment was found to be the most effective followed by Pyrisept and chlorhexidine.

Conclusions

The bactericidal effect of the different antiseptics used in the present study was found to vary significantly against S. aureus in biofilm. The present study gives valuable knowledge with regards to selecting the antiseptics that are most likely to be successful in treating biofilm infected wounds. This study also contributes to focus attention on the importance of qualifying antiseptics based on results using biofilm bacteria rather than planktonic bacteria.

【 授权许可】

   
2015 Vestby and Nesse; licensee BioMed Central.

【 图 表 】

Figure 1.

Figure 2.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Costerton JW, Stewart PS, Greenberg EP. Bacterial biofilms: a common cause of persistent infections. Science. 1999; 284(5418):1318-22.
• [2]Percival SL, Hill KE, Williams DW, Hooper SJ, Thomas DW, Costerton JW. A review of the scientific evidence for biofilms in wounds. Wound Repair Regen. 2012; 20(5):647-57.
• [3]Cooper R. Biofilms and wounds: much ado about nothing? Wounds UK. 2010; 6(4):85-90.
• [4]Brackman G, De Meyer L, Nelis HJ, Coenye T. Biofilm inhibitory and eradicating activity of wound care products against Staphylococcus aureus and Staphylococcus epidermidis biofilms in an in vitro chronic wound model. J Appl Microbiol. 2013; 114(6):1833-42.
• [5]Diekema DJ, Pfaller MA, Schmitz FJ, Smayevsky J, Bell J, Jones RN et al.. Survey of infections due to Staphylococcus species: frequency of occurrence and antimicrobial susceptibility of isolates collected in the United States, Canada, Latin America, Europe, and the Western Pacific region for the SENTRY Antimicrobial Surveillance Program, 1997–1999. Clin Infect Dis. 2001; 32 Suppl 2:S114-32.
• [6]Fridkin SK, Hageman JC, Morrison M, Sanza LT, Como-Sabetti K, Jernigan JA et al.. Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus disease in three communities. New Engl J Med. 2005; 352(14):1436-44.
• [7]McDonnell G, Russell AD. Antiseptics and disinfectants: activity, action, and resistance. Clin Microbiol Rev. 1999; 12(1):147-79.
• [8]Gilbert P, Moore LE. Cationic antiseptics: diversity of action under a common epithet. J Appl Microbiol. 2005; 99(4):703-15.
• [9]Bonez PC, Dos Santos Alves CF, Dalmolin TV, Agertt VA, Mizdal CR, Flores Vda C et al.. Chlorhexidine activity against bacterial biofilms. Am J Infect Control. 2013; 41(12):e119-22.
• [10]Masadeh MM, Gharaibeh SF, Alzoubi KH, Al-Azzam SI, Obeidat WM. Antimicrobial activity of common mouthwash solutions on multidrug-resistance bacterial biofilms. J Clin Med Res. 2013; 5(5):389-94.
• [11]Otto M. Staphylococcal biofilms. Currt Top Microbiol. 2008; 322:207-28.
• [12]Tote K, Horemans T, Vanden Berghe D, Maes L, Cos P. Inhibitory effect of biocides on the viable masses and matrices of Staphylococcus aureus and Pseudomonas aeruginosa biofilms. Appl Environ Microbiol. 2010; 76(10):3135-42.
• [13]Kiedrowski MR, Horswill AR. New approaches for treating staphylococcal biofilm infections. Ann NY Acad Sci. 2011; 1241:104-21.
• [14]Moretro T, Vestby LK, Nesse LL, Storheim S, Kotlarz K, Langsrud S. Evaluation of efficacy of disinfectants against Salmonella from the feed industry. J Appl Microbiol. 2009; 106(3):1005-12.