Evaluation of the efficacy of biocides in removing biofilms produced by multidrug-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa
Keywords:Pseudomonas aeruginosa; Biofilms; Biocides; Carbapenems.
Pseudomonas aeruginosa is one of the most frequent pathogens in infections affecting burn patients, having as an important determinant of pathogenicity its ability to form biofilms. The present work aims to evaluate the effectiveness of biocidal solutions: 4% chlorhexidine, 1% sodium hypochlorite, 5% hydrogen peroxide and 70% alcohol on removal P. aeruginosa multidrug-resistant biofilms. This is a descriptive study with a quantitative approach. Biofilms from nine strains of P. aeruginosa, of different clonal types, were evaluated. Eight strains were carbapenem-resistant and one susceptible, collected from burned patients and balneotherapy tables. Strains were grown together with stainless steel coupons and incubated for 24 h. Subsequently, the coupons were treated with and without biocides, at contact times of 15, 5 and 0 minutes. Biofilm removal was assessed by counting viable cells obtained from coupons with and without treatment. The minimum inhibitory concentration for imipenem and meropenem was determined by using the epsilometric method. Biofilm formation was observed in all coupons not treated with biocides. However, there was no count of viable cells after contact of the biofilm with all biocidal solutions, in all times. The minimum inhibitory concentration to carbapenems varied between 16 to ≥ 32µg / mL. It was concluded that all the disinfectant solutions evaluated were effective in removing biofilms produced by the studied P. aeruginosa strains.
Abdallah, M., Benoliel, C., Drider, D., Dhulster, P., & Chihib, N. E. (2014). Biofilm formation and persistence on abiotic surfaces in the context of food and medical environments. Arch Microbiol, 196(7), 453-472.
Albayrak, Y., Temiz, A., Albayrak, A., Peksöz, R., Albayrak, F., & Tanrıkulu, Y. (2018). A retrospective analysis of 2713 hospitalized burn patients in a burns center in Turkey. Ulus Travma Acil Cerrahi Derg, 24(1), 25-30.
Attinger, C., & Wolcott, R. (2012). Clinically Addressing Biofilm in Chronic Wounds. Adv Wound Care (New Rochelle), 1(3), 127-132.
Banu, A., Mathew, P., Manasa, S., & Shetty, A. B. (2017). Bacteriological profile of burn wound infections with reference to biofilm formation. J Bacteriol Mycol Open Access, 4(4), 127-129.
Bonez, P. C., Dos Santos Alves, C. F., Dalmolin, T. V., Agertt, V. A., Mizdal, C. R., Flores, V. C., Marques, J. B., Santos, R. C. V., & Anraku de Campos, M. M. (2013). Chlorhexidine activity against bacterial biofilms. Am J Infect Control, 41(12), e119-122.
Cerf, O., Carpentier, B., & Sanders, P. (2010). Tests for determining in-use concentrations of antibiotics and disinfectants are based on entirely different concepts: "resistance" has different meanings. Int J Food Microbiol, 136(3), 247-254.
Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute (2018). Performance standards for antimicrobial susceptibility testing, (28th ed.), CLSI, Wayne, P.A.
Costerton, J. W. (1999). Introduction to biofilm. Int J Antimicrob Agents, 11(3-4), 217-221; discussion 237-219.
de Almeida Silva, K. C., Calomino, M. A., Deutsch, G., de Castilho, S. R., de Paula, G. R., Esper, L. M., & Teixeira, L. A. (2017). Molecular characterization of multidrug-resistant (MDR) Pseudomonas aeruginosa isolated in a burn center. Burns, 43(1), 137-143.
Deutsch, G., Bokehi, L. C., Silva, A. E. G. P. R., Guimarães Junior, L. M., Rodrigues, R., Esper, L. M. R., Gonzalez, A. G. M., Paula, G. R., Castilho, S. R., & Teixeira, L. A. (2016). Balneotherapy is a potential risk factor for pseudomonas aeruginosa colonization. Braz J Pharm Sci, 52(1), 125-132.
Djuric, O., Markovic-Denic, L., Jovanovic, B., & Bumbasirevic, V. (2019). High incidence of multiresistant bacterial isolates from bloodstream infections in trauma emergency department and intensive care unit in Serbia. Acta Microbiol Immunol Hung, 66(3), 307-325.
Flemming, H. C., Neu, T. R., & Wozniak, D. J. (2007). The EPS matrix: the "house of biofilm cells". J Bacteriol, 189(22), 7945-7947.
Ghanbarzadeh Corehtash, Z., Khorshidi, A., Firoozeh, F., Akbari, H., & Mahmoudi Aznaveh, A. (2015). Biofilm Formation and Virulence Factors Among Pseudomonas aeruginosa Isolated From Burn Patients. Jundishapur J Microbiol, 8(10), e22345.
Gilbert, P., Allison, D. G., & McBain, A. J. (2002). Biofilms in vitro and in vivo: do singular mechanisms imply cross-resistance? J Appl Microbiol, 92 Suppl, 98S-110S.
Glik, J., Łabuś, W., Kitala, D., Mikuś-Zagórska, K., Roberts, C. D., Nowak, M., Kasperczyk, A., & Kawecki, M. (2018). A 2000 patient retrospective assessment of a new strategy for burn wound management in view of infection prevention and treatment. Int Wound J, 15(3), 344-349.
Hajská, M., Slobodníková, L., Hupková, H., & Koller, J. (2014). In vitro efficacy of various topical antimicrobial agents in different time periods from contamination to application against 6 multidrug-resistant bacterial strains isolated from burn patients. Burns, 40(4), 713-718.
Høiby, N., Bjarnsholt, T., Givskov, M., Molin, S., & Ciofu, O. (2010). Antibiotic resistance of bacterial biofilms. Int J Antimicrob Agents, 35(4), 322-332.
Jabalameli, F., Mirsalehian, A., Khoramian, B., Aligholi, M., Khoramrooz, S. S., Asadollahi, P., Taherikalani, M., & Emaneini, M. (2012). Evaluation of biofilm production and characterization of genes encoding type III secretion system among Pseudomonas aeruginosa isolated from burn patients. Burns, 38(8), 1192-1197.
Kao, C. Y., Chen, S. S., Hung, K. H., Wu, H. M., Hsueh, P. R., Yan, J. J., & Wu, J. J. (2016). Overproduction of active efflux pump and variations of OprD dominate in imipenem-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa isolated from patients with bloodstream infections in Taiwan. BMC Microbiol, 16(1), 107.
Kowalske, K. J. (2011). Burn wound care. Phys Med Rehabil Clin N Am, 22(2), 213-227.
Malone, M., Bjarnsholt, T., McBain, A. J., James, G. A., Stoodley, P., Leaper, D., Tachi, M., Schultz, G., Swanson, T., & Wolcott, R. D. (2017). The prevalence of biofilms in chronic wounds: a systematic review and meta-analysis of published data. J Wound Care, 26(1), 20-25.
Marino, M., Frigo, F., Bartolomeoli, I., & Maifreni, M. (2011). Safety-related properties of staphylococci isolated from food and food environments. J Appl Microbiol, 110(2), 550-561.
McDonnell, G., & Russell, A. D. (1999). Antiseptics and disinfectants: activity, action, and resistance. Clin Microbiol Rev, 12(1), 147-179.
Meletis, G. (2016). Carbapenem resistance: overview of the problem and future perspectives. Ther Adv Infect Dis, 3(1), 15-21.
Miyaue, S., Suzuki, E., Komiyama, Y., Kondo, Y., Morikawa, M., & Maeda, S. (2018). Bacterial Memory of Persisters: Bacterial Persister Cells Can Retain Their Phenotype for Days or Weeks After Withdrawal From Colony-Biofilm Culture. Front Microbiol, 9, 1396.
Nunez Lopez, O., Cambiaso-Daniel, J., Branski, L. K., Norbury, W. B., & Herndon, D. N. (2017). Predicting and managing sepsis in burn patients: current perspectives. Ther Clin Risk Manag, 13, 1107-1117.
Parizzi, S. Q. F., Andrade, N. J. d., Silva, C. A. d. S., Soares, N. d. F. F., & Silva, E. A. M. d. (2004). Bacterial adherence to different inert surfaces evaluated by epifluorescence microscopy and plate count method. Braz Arch Biol Technol, 47(1), 77-83.
Pereira, A. S., Shitsuka, D. M., Parreira, F. J., & Shitsuka, R. (2018). Metodologia da pesquisa científica. [e-book]. Santa Maria. Ed. UAB/NTE/UFSM. Recuperado de https://repositorio.ufsm.br/bitstream/handle/1/15824/Lic_Computacao_Metodologia-Pesquisa-Cientifica.pdf?sequence=1.
Ramos-Gallardo, G. (2016). Chronic Wounds in Burn Injury: A Case Report on Importance of Biofilms. World J Plast Surg, 5(2), 175-180.
Schultz, L., Walker, S. A., Elligsen, M., Walker, S. E., Simor, A., Mubareka, S., & Daneman, N. (2013). Identification of predictors of early infection in acute burn patients. Burns, 39(7), 1355-1366.
Singh, G., Wu, B., Baek, M. S., Camargo, A., Nguyen, A., Slusher, N. A., Srinivasan, R., Wiener-Kronish, J. P., & Lynch, S. V. (2010). Secretion of Pseudomonas aeruginosa type III cytotoxins is dependent on pseudomonas quinolone signal concentration. Microb Pathog, 49(4), 196-203.
Surdeau, N., Laurent-Maquin, D., Bouthors, S., & Gellé, M. P. (2006). Sensitivity of bacterial biofilms and planktonic cells to a new antimicrobial agent, Oxsil 320N. J Hosp Infect, 62(4), 487-493.
Toté, K., Horemans, T., Vanden Berghe, D., Maes, L., & Cos, P. (2010). Inhibitory effect of biocides on the viable masses and matrices of Staphylococcus aureus and Pseudomonas aeruginosa biofilms. Appl Environ Microbiol, 76(10), 3135-3142.
Varkey, M., Visscher, D. O., van Zuijlen, P. P. M., Atala, A., & Yoo, J. J. (2019). Skin bioprinting: the future of burn wound reconstruction? Burns & Trauma, 7, s41038-019-0142-7.
Waters, E. M., Rowe, S. E., O'Gara, J. P., & Conlon, B. P. (2016). Convergence of Staphylococcus aureus Persister and Biofilm Research: Can Biofilms Be Defined as Communities of Adherent Persister Cells? PLoS Pathog, 12(12), e1006012.
Wolcott, R., & Dowd, S. (2011). The role of biofilms: are we hitting the right target? Plast Reconstr Surg, 127 Suppl 1, 28S-35S.
How to Cite
Copyright (c) 2020 Keila de Cássia Ferreira de Almeida Silva, Mariana Alcântara Calomino, Gabriela Deutsch, Bruna Maiara Ferreira Barreto Pires, Lenise Arneiro Teixeira, Geraldo Renato de Paula
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
1) Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
2) Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
3) Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work.