Influence of material on the development of device-associated infections

Rochford, Edward T.J.; Richards, R. Geoff; Moriarty, T. Fintan

doi:10.1111/j.1469-0691.2012.04002.x

Cited by 106 publications

(62 citation statements)

References 53 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Within the scope of the experiment, limited attempts were made to understand how material properties may have contributed to the findings. We found that parylene had a significantly reduced contact angle and appeared smoother in SEM images as compared to bare titanium, potentially providing less opportunity for biofilm formation 20–22 . However, we observed the opposite relationship between contact angle and surface smoothness when parylene was compared to polyurethane.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 62%

Reduced bacterial adhesion with parylene coating: Potential implications for Micra transcatheter pacemakers

El‐Chami

Mayotte

Bonner

et al. 2020

Cardiovasc electrophysiol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction Infections of cardiac implantable electronic devices remain a prevalent health concern necessitating the advent of novel preventative strategies. Based on the observation that bacterial infections of the Micra transcatheter pacemaker device are extremely rare, we examine the effect of parylene coating on bacterial adhesion and growth. Methods Bacterial growth was compared on polyurethane coated, bare, or parylene coated titanium surfaces. Eight test samples per bacterial species and material combination were incubated with Staphylococcus Aureus or Pseudomonas aeruginosa for 24 hours and then assayed for bacterial growth. The surface contact angle was also characterized by measuring the angle between the tangent to the surface of a liquid droplet made with the surface of the solid sample. Results The mean bacterial colony counts were significantly reduced for both parylene coated titanium versus bare samples (3.69 ± 0.27 and 4.80 ± 0.48 log[CFU/mL] respectively for S. aureus [P < .001] and 5.51 ± 0.27 and 6.08 ± 0.11 log[CFU/mL] respectively for P. aeruginosa [P < .001]), and for parylene coated titanium versus polyurethane samples (4.27 ± 0.42 and 5.40 ± 0.49 log[CFU/mL] respectively for S. aureus [P < .001] and 4.23 ± 0.42 and 4.84 ± 0.32 log[CFU/mL] respectively for P. aeruginosa [P = .006]). Parylene coated titanium samples had a higher contact angle compared with bare titanium, but lower compared with polyurethane (mean contact angle 87.5 ± 3.1 degrees parylene, 73.3 ± 3.7 degrees titanium [P < .001 vs parylene], and 94.8 ± 3.7 degrees polyurethane [P = .002 vs parylene]). Conclusions Parylene coating significantly reduced the ability of bacteria to grow in colony count assays suggesting that this could contribute to the reduction of bacterial infections of Micra transcatheter pacemakers.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 62%

Reduced bacterial adhesion with parylene coating: Potential implications for Micra transcatheter pacemakers

El‐Chami

Mayotte

Bonner

et al. 2020

Cardiovasc electrophysiol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Bacterial adhesion was studied in four different conditions: (1) In normoxia at the presence of PBS, (2) in normoxia at the presence of S53P4 granules using PBS pretreated 2 h with S53P4, (3) in hypoxia at the presence of PBS and 4) in hypoxia at the presence of S53P4 granules using PBS pretreated 2 h with S53P4.…”

Section: Staphylococcal Adhesion Experimentsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The presence of an implanted device results in an increased susceptibility to postoperative infection [1,2] because the number of bacteria required to produce an implant infection is reduced [3,4]. This is due to the fact that bacteria adhere easier to an inactive substratum, which is not incorporated to the host defense system.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effect of S53P4 bone substitute on staphylococcal adhesion and biofilm formation on other implant materials in normal and hypoxic conditions

Pérez‐Tanoira

García-Pedrazuela

Hyyrynen

et al. 2015

J Mater Sci: Mater Med

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

To study the effect of bioactive glass bone substitute granules (S53P4) on bacterial adhesion and biofilm formation on other simultaneously used implant materials and the role of the hypoxic conditions to the adhesion. Bacterial and biofilm formation were studied on materials used both in middle ear prostheses and in fracture fixtures (titanium, polytetrafluoroethylene, polydimethylsiloxane and bioactive glass plates) in the presence or absence of S53P4 granules. The experiments were done either in normal atmosphere or in hypoxia simulating atmospheric conditions of middle ear, mastoid cavity and sinuses. We used two collection strains of Staphylococcus aureus and Staphylococcus epidermidis. In the presence of bioglass and hypoxic conditions the adhesion of the planktonic bacterial cells was decreased for most of the materials. The biofilm formation was decreased for S. epidermidis on titanium and polydimethylsiloxane in both atmospheric conditions and on bioglass plates in normoxia. For S. aureus the biofilm formation was decreased on bioglass plates and polytetrafluoroethylene in normoxia. Hypoxia produces a decrease in the biofilm formation only for S. aureus on polytetrafluoroethylene and for S. epidermidis on bioglass plates. However, in none of the cases bioactive glass increased the bacterial or biofilm adhesion. The presence of bioglass in normoxic and hypoxic conditions prevents the bacterial and biofilm adhesion on surfaces of several typical prosthesis materials in vitro. This may lead to diminishing postoperative infections, however, further in vivo studies are needed.

show abstract

“…Upon placement, the device is conditioned by host proteins, such as fibronectin and collagen, which can serve as ligands for bacterial attachment via microbial surface components recognizing adhesive matrix molecules (MSCRAMMS) (4, 9, 11, 15, 106, 107). Therefore, the wound healing responses elicited after medical device implantation can inadvertently provide a rich environment for bacterial colonization; however, they can also set the stage for a very specific immune response that is incapable of mediating bacterial clearance, as described below (108). Staphylococcal biofilm-associated protein (Bap) can facilitate adherence to host epithelial cells through the inhibition of MSCRAMM-mediated attachment (109, 110).…”

Section: Hijacking the Host Responsementioning

confidence: 99%

Hiding in Plain Sight: Interplay between Staphylococcal Biofilms and Host Immunity

et al. 2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Staphylococcus aureus and Staphylococcus epidermidis are notable for their propensity to form biofilms on implanted medical devices. Staphylococcal biofilm infections are typified by their recalcitrance to antibiotics and ability to circumvent host immune-mediated clearance, resulting in the establishment of chronic infections that are often recurrent in nature. Indeed, the immunomodulatory lifestyle of biofilms seemingly shapes the host immune response to ensure biofilm engraftment and persistence in an immune competent host. Here, we provide a brief review of the mechanisms whereby S. aureus and S. epidermidis biofilms manipulate host–pathogen interactions and discuss the concept of microenvironment maintenance in infectious outcomes, as well as speculate how these findings pertain to the challenges of staphylococcal vaccine development.

show abstract

Influence of material on the development of device-associated infections

Cited by 106 publications

References 53 publications

Reduced bacterial adhesion with parylene coating: Potential implications for Micra transcatheter pacemakers

Reduced bacterial adhesion with parylene coating: Potential implications for Micra transcatheter pacemakers

Effect of S53P4 bone substitute on staphylococcal adhesion and biofilm formation on other implant materials in normal and hypoxic conditions

Hiding in Plain Sight: Interplay between Staphylococcal Biofilms and Host Immunity

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About