2011
DOI: 10.4161/hv.7.6.15407
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Development of a rat central venous catheter model for evaluation of vaccines to preventStaphylococcus epidermidisandStaphylococcus aureusearly biofilms

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
9
0

Year Published

2012
2012
2015
2015

Publication Types

Select...
7
2

Relationship

2
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 16 publications
(10 citation statements)
references
References 39 publications
1
9
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In validating our model, we found that rats required immunosuppression and a high inoculum, consistent with previous reports (76,77,88,89). Following validation, we used the model to assess virulence of the mutant S. epidermidis strains 3 days postinfection.…”
Section: Figsupporting
confidence: 64%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…In validating our model, we found that rats required immunosuppression and a high inoculum, consistent with previous reports (76,77,88,89). Following validation, we used the model to assess virulence of the mutant S. epidermidis strains 3 days postinfection.…”
Section: Figsupporting
confidence: 64%
“…***, P Ͻ 0.001; **, P Ͻ 0.01; *, P Ͻ 0.05 (n Ն 4 biological replicates). inocula of S. epidermidis from the bloodstream in the absence of a foreign body (76,77), to increase the percentage of catheters seeded following S. epidermidis challenge, rats were given intraperitoneal injections of CP to produce leukopenia. To validate our model and confirm that the presence of a catheter and immunosuppression are critical for S. epidermidis infection, rats were divided into four groups prior to bacterial inoculation: (i) catheter plus CP, (ii) catheter only, (iii) CP only, and (iv) no catheter or CP (no treatment).…”
Section: Figmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Delivery of the challenge inoculum directly into the catheter lumen (37,38) is not suitable for vaccine or passive antibody studies because the bacteria are protected from host humoral and cell-mediated effectors. Likewise, intravascular injection of bacteria to achieve hematogenous colonization of the external catheter surface is highly problematic because megadoses (Ͼ10 9 cells) of bacteria are required (39) and it is impossible to distinguish whether the intervention is targeting the planktonic form or the biofilm form. Further, given that the ideal strategy is to inhibit biofilm formation at its earliest stages, it is not practical to surgically implant catheters with preformed biofilms to circumvent the catheter colonization issue.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For UTI, in vitro and in vivo studies demonstrated that immunization with FimH or components of the P pilus from UPEC reduced in vivo colonization of the bladder mucosa (319,320). For CVC-related infections, a rat model enabled assessment of immunization of rats prior to catheter insertion, leading to a protective effect in bacterial colonization of the device by S. aureus or S. epidermidis (321). In that study, two different antigens were used: SERP0630 (MenD) (for S. epidermidis) and SACOL1138, or iron-regulated surface determinant B (IsdB) (for S. aureus).…”
Section: Targeting Biofilm Recalcitrance: Progress and Perspectivesmentioning
confidence: 99%