Evaluation of the efficacy of three medical device detergents on bacteria and yeast derived biofilm: a comparative study
2
조회
0
다운로드
0
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
Background: This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of three medical detergents againstbacteria and yeast-derived biofilms. Methods: The biofilm removal efficacy of EmpowerTM (Metrex, USA), CidezymeTM (Johnsonand Johnson Medical Inc, USA), and Matrix mintTM (Whiteley Medical, Australia) werecompared to that of chlorine bleach. Biofilms were produced using Staphylococcus aureusRN9120, Escherichia coli ATCC35218, Pseudomonas aeruginosa ATCC27853, Candida albicansATCC14053, and clinical isolates of Enterococcus faecalis, E. coli, Klebsiella pneumoniae,Candida auris, and Trichosporon asahii. The organisms were suspended in tryptic soy broth(TSB) in 96-well microplates and cultured for 72 hours. They were treated with the detergents,and the residual biofilm mass was quantified using crystal violet staining followed by opticaldensity measurements at 620 nm (OD620). Results: EmpowerTM and CidezymeTM significantly reduced the biofilm mass derived from allspecies by > 50% of OD620 at 37ºC except those from E. faecalis, T. asahii, and C. auris. MatrixmintTM had no effect on the biofilms under any condition. Conclusion: The culture conditions and the species of the biofilm-producing organisminfluenced the effectiveness of the detergent. Biofilms produced by E. faecalis, C. auris, and T. asahii were resistant to all detergent treatments under all conditions.
Abstract
Background: This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of three medical detergents againstbacteria and yeast-derived biofilms. Methods: The biofilm removal efficacy of EmpowerTM (Metrex, USA), CidezymeTM (Johnsonand Johnson Medical Inc, USA), and Matrix mintTM (Whiteley Medical, Australia) werecompared to that of chlorine bleach. Biofilms were produced using Staphylococcus aureusRN9120, Escherichia coli ATCC35218, Pseudomonas aeruginosa ATCC27853, Candida albicansATCC14053, and clinical isolates of Enterococcus faecalis, E. coli, Klebsiella pneumoniae,Candida auris, and Trichosporon asahii. The organisms were suspended in tryptic soy broth(TSB) in 96-well microplates and cultured for 72 hours. They were treated with the detergents,and the residual biofilm mass was quantified using crystal violet staining followed by opticaldensity measurements at 620 nm (OD620). Results: EmpowerTM and CidezymeTM significantly reduced the biofilm mass derived from allspecies by > 50% of OD620 at 37ºC except those from E. faecalis, T. asahii, and C. auris. MatrixmintTM had no effect on the biofilms under any condition. Conclusion: The culture conditions and the species of the biofilm-producing organisminfluenced the effectiveness of the detergent. Biofilms produced by E. faecalis, C. auris, and T. asahii were resistant to all detergent treatments under all conditions.
참고문헌 (31)
- Davies D, "Understanding biofilm resistance to antibacterial agents", Nat Rev Drug Discov, 2, pp.114~122 (2003)
- Sutherland IW, "The biofilm matrix-an immobilized but dynamic microbial environment", Trends Microbiol, 9, pp.222~227 (2001)
- Flemming HC, "Relevance of microbial extracellular polymeric substances(EPSs)--part I : structural and ecological aspects", Water Sci Technol, 43, pp.1~8 (2001)
- "Guideline for disinfection and sterilization in healthcare facilities" (2008)[URL]
- Wang S, "Strategy to combat biofilms : a focus on biofilm dispersal enzymes", NPJ Biofilms Microbiomes, 9, pp.63~ (2023)
- Wilcox MH, "Comparison of the effect of detergent versus hypochlorite cleaning on environmental contamination and incidence of Clostridium difficile infection", J Hosp Infect, 54, pp.109~114 (2003)
- Gonzalez JA, "On-site comparison of an enzymatic detergent and a non-enzymatic detergent-disinfectant for routine manual cleaning of flexible endoscopes", Endosc Int Open, 7, pp.E412~E420 (2019)
- Zühlsdorf B, "Cleaning efficacy of nine different cleaners in a washer–disinfector designed for flexible endoscopes", J Hosp Infect, 52, pp.206~211 (2002)
- Fang Y, "A study of the efficacy of bacterial biofilm cleanout for gastrointestinal endoscopes", World J Gastroenterol, 16, pp.1019~1024 (2010)
- Ren W, "Evaluation of detergents and contact time on biofilm removal from flexible endoscopes", Am J Infect Control, 41, pp.e89~e92 (2013)
- Vickery K, "Removal of biofilm from endoscopes : evaluation of detergent efficiency", Am J Infect Control, 32, pp.170~176 (2004)
- da Costa Luciano C, "Evaluation of the ability of different detergents and disinfectants to remove and kill organisms in traditional biofilm", Am J Infect Control, 44, pp.e243~e249 (2016)
- Sakoulas G, "Accessory gene regulator(agr)locus in geographically diverse Staphylococcus aureus isolates with reduced susceptibility to vancomycin", Antimicrob Agents Chemother, 46, pp.1492~1502 (2002)
- Mangwani N, "Effect of biofilm parameters and extracellular polymeric substance composition on polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon degradation", RSC Adv, 6, pp.S7540~51 (2016)
- Musleh RM, "Crystal violet binding assay for assessment of biofilm formation by Klebsiella pneumoniae on catheter, glass and stainless-steel surfaces", Iraqi J Sci, 55, pp.1208~1212 (2014)
- Stiefel P, "Enzymes enhance biofilm removal efficiency of cleaners", Antimicrob Agents Chemother, 60, pp.3647~3652 (2016)
- Stiefel P, "Is biofilm removal properly assessed? Comparison of different quantification methods in a 96-well plate system", Appl Microbiol Biotechnol, 100, pp.4135~4145 (2016)
- 이수민, "Effect of NaCl on Biofilm Formation of the Isolate from Staphylococcus aureus Outbreak Linked to Ham", 한국축산식품학회지, 34(2), pp.257~261 (2014), 한국축산식품학회[DOI]
- Borucki MK, "Variation in biofilm formation among strains of Listeria monocytogenes", Appl Environ Microbiol, 69, pp.7336~7342 (2003)
- Lianou A, "Strain variability in biofilm formation : a food safety and quality perspective", Food Res Int, 137, pp.109424~ (2020)
- Hoiby N, "ESCMID guideline for the diagnosis and treatment of biofilm infections 2014", Clin Microbiol Infect, 21, pp.S1~S25 (2015)
- Fanning S, "Fungal biofilms", PLoS Pathog, 8, pp.e1002585~ (2012)
- Rahman MR, "Duodenoscope-associated infections : update on an emerging problem", Dig Dis Sci, 64, pp.1409~1418 (2019)
- Aumeran C, "Multidrug-resistant Klebsiella pneumoniae outbreak after endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography", Endoscopy, 42, pp.895~899 (2010)
- Molobela IP, "Protease and amylase enzymes for biofilm removal and degradation of extracellular polymeric substances(EPS)produced by Pseudomonas fluorescens bacteria", Afr J Microbiol Res, 4, pp.1515~1524 (2010)
- Tristezza M, "Susceptibility of wine spoilage yeasts and bacteria in the planktonic state and in biofilms to disinfectants", Ann Microbiol, 60, pp.549~556 (2010)
- Sun W, "Novel surfactant peptide for removal of biofilms", Colloids Surf B Biointerfaces, 172, pp.180~186 (2018)
- Ribeiro MM, "The polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE)channel model of cyclic-buildup biofilm and traditional biofilm: the impact of friction, and detergent on cleaning and subsequent high-level disinfection", Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol, 41, pp.172~180 (2020)
- Beilenhoff U, "Reprocessing of flexible endoscopes and endoscopic accessories used in gastrointestinal endoscopy : position statement of the European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy(ESGE)and European Society of Gastroenterology Nurses and Associates(ESGENA)-update 2018", Endoscopy, 50, pp.1205~1234 (2018)
- Maillard JY, "How biofilm changes our understanding of cleaning and disinfection", Antimicrob Resist Infect Control, 12, pp.95~ (2023)
- Wolcott R, "The polymicrobial nature of biofilm infection", Clin Microbiol Infect, 19, pp.107~112 (2013)