Anti-Biofilm Effect of Octenidine and Polyhexanide on Uropathogenic Biofilm-Producing Bacteria

Abstract

<b><i>Background:</i></b> A catheter allowing a release of antibacterial substances such as antiseptics into the bladder could be a new way of preventing biofilm formation and subsequent catheter-associated urinary tract infections. <b><i>Methods:</i></b> Minimal inhibitory and bactericidal concentration (MIC/MBC) determinations in cation-adjusted Mueller-Hinton broth and artificial urine were performed for 4 antiseptics against 3 uropathogenic biofilm producers, <i>Escherichia coli</i>, <i>Pseudomonas aeruginosa</i>, and <i>Proteus mirabilis</i>. Furthermore, effects of octenidine and polyhexanide against catheter biofilm formation were determined by quantification of biofilm-producing bacteria. <b><i>Results:</i></b> Sodium hypochlorite showed MIC/MBC values between 200 and 800 mg/L for all strains tested. Triclosan was efficient against <i>E. coli</i> and <i>P. mirabilis</i> (MIC ≤2.98 mg/L) but ineffective against <i>P. aeruginosa</i>. Octenidine and polyhexanide showed antibacterial activity against all 3 species tested (MIC 1.95–7.8 and 3.9–31.25 mg/L). Both octenidine and polyhexanide were able to prevent biofilm formation on catheter segments in a concentration dependent manner. Furthermore, adding 250 mg/L of each biocide disrupted biofilms formed by <i>E. coli</i> and <i>P. mirabilis</i>, whereas even 500 mg/L was not sufficient to completely destroy <i>P. aeruginosa</i> biofilms. <b><i>Conclusion:</i></b> Octenidine- and polyhexanide-containing antiseptics showed a broad effect against typical uropathogenic biofilm producers even in high dilutions. This study provides a basis for further investigation of the potential of octenidine and polyhexanide as prophylaxis or treatment of catheter biofilms.

Antibiofilm Properties of Antiseptic Agents Used on Pseudomonas aeruginosa Isolated from Diabetic Foot Ulcers

“…Moreover, we noted no difference in the MIC values of the other antiseptics compared with previous studies, suggesting that the BHI medium was not solely responsible for the results obtained with the two first antiseptics. The MIC values of PHMB and octenidine were 15.6 mg·L −1 and 7.8 mg·L −1 , respectively, in accordance with previous studies [ 33 , 37 , 40 , 41 , 42 , 43 ]. These findings support weaker concentrations compared to the commercialized solutions routinely used.…”

“…For sodium hypochlorite, the MIC values obtained in our study (1666 mg·L −1 and 1:3 dilution) are 3- to 5-fold higher than the ones previously obtained [ 31 , 32 , 33 , 34 , 35 ]. This variation may be related to the differences in the studied strains and in the media used, as previously noted [ 36 ].…”

In vitro evaluation of the antimicrobial activity of antiseptics against clinical Acinetobacter baumannii strains isolated from combat wounds

“…A strong negative correlation between the biofilm-forming properties of A. baumannii in the presence of sub-bacteriostatic concentrations of these mentioned antiseptics and their susceptibility toward them indicates the dependence of these properties on antiseptic concentration, not on the increased susceptibility of individual strains. The correctness of our interpretation is confirmed by the studies of Loose et al (2021) where octenidine and polyhexanide prevented biofilm formation in Escherichia coli, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, and Proteus mirabilis, depending on antiseptic concentration ( Loose et al, 2021 ). Moreover, 0.25% (w/w) of povidone-iodine completely eradicated the biofilms of all multidrug-resistant microorganisms ( Capriotti et al, 2018 ).…”

“…Among the variety of antiseptic preparations, ñationic surfactants (CSs) and complex compounds of iodine and the synthetic polymer polyvinylpyrolidone (povidone-iodine) deserve special attention. Because of their important properties, such as the non-selectivity of the antimicrobial effect on the bacterial cell, sufficient biological safety, lack of toxic effect, and weak irritating effect on the skin, mucous membranes, and tissues of wound surfaces, CSs are considered the most promising ( Junka et al, 2014 ; Alvarez-Marin et al, 2017 ; Davis et al, 2017 ; Hoekstra et al, 2017 ; Santos et al, 2017 ; Shepherd et al, 2018 ; Htun et al, 2019 ; Jeronimo et al, 2020 ; Huang et al, 2021 ; Krasowski et al, 2021 ; Lin et al, 2021 ; Loose et al, 2021 ).…”

From Antibacterial to Antibiofilm Targeting: An Emerging Paradigm Shift in the Development of Quaternary Ammonium Compounds (QACs)

“…Some commercially available and newly synthesized QACs are effective against mature biofilms both when used alone and as part of combination therapy. 36 The current trend toward a more rational use of antibacterial drugs and the desire to prevent infections rather than treatment both contribute to the development of the market for long-acting biocidal materials. Thus, QACs can be incorporated into long-term antimicrobial materials and coatings to either prevent adhesion of microorganisms or actively kill them to suppress biofilm formation.…”