1887

Abstract

Surface microtopography offers a promising approach for infection control. The goal of this study was to provide evidence that micropatterned surfaces significantly reduce the potential risk of medical device-associated infections.

Micropatterned and smooth surfaces were challenged against the colonization and transference of two representative bacterial pathogens – and . A percutaneous rat model was used to assess the effectiveness of the micropattern against device-associated infections. After the percutaneous insertion of silicone rods into (healthy or immunocompromised) rats, their backs were inoculated with . The bacterial burdens were determined in tissues under the rods and in the spleens.

The micropatterns reduced adherence by (92.3 and 90.5 % reduction for flat and cylindrical surfaces, respectively), while colonization was limited by 99.9 % (flat) and 95.5 % (cylindrical). The micropatterned surfaces restricted transference by 95.1 % for and 94.9 % for , compared to smooth surfaces. Rats with micropatterned devices had substantially fewer in subcutaneous tissues (91 %) and spleens (88 %) compared to those with smooth ones. In a follow-up study, immunocompromised rats with micropatterned devices had significantly lower bacterial burdens on devices (99.5 and 99.9 % reduction on external and internal segments, respectively), as well as in subcutaneous tissues (97.8 %) and spleens (90.7 %) compared to those with smooth devices.

Micropatterned surfaces exhibited significantly reduced colonization and transference , as well as lower bacterial burdens in animal models. These results indicate that introducing this micropattern onto surfaces has high potential to reduce medical device-associated infections.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journal/jmm/10.1099/jmm.0.000600
2017-11-01
2019-12-12
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/jmm/66/11/1692.html?itemId=/content/journal/jmm/10.1099/jmm.0.000600&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

References

  1. Zierer A, Melby SJ, Voeller RK, Guthrie TJ, Ewald GA et al. Late-onset driveline infections: the Achilles' heel of prolonged left ventricular assist device support. Ann Thorac Surg 2007;84:515–520 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Salgado CD, Chinnes L, Paczesny TH, Cantey JR. Increased rate of catheter-related bloodstream infection associated with use of a needleless mechanical valve device at a long-term acute care hospital. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2007;28:684–688 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Safdar N, Maki DG. Risk of catheter-related bloodstream infection with peripherally inserted central venous catheters used in hospitalized patients. Chest 2005;128:489–495 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Renz N, Haupenthal J, Schuetz MA, Trampuz A. Hematogenous vertebral osteomyelitis associated with intravascular device-associated infections - a retrospective cohort study. Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis 2017;88:75–81 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Haque A, Ahmed SA, Rafique Z, Abbas Q, Jurair H et al. Device-associated infections in a paediatric intensive care unit in Pakistan. J Hosp Infect 2017;95:98–100 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Leuck AM. Left ventricular assist device driveline infections: recent advances and future goals. J Thorac Dis 2015;7:2151–2157 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Wang Y, Jayan G, Patwardhan D, Phillips KS. Antimicrobial and anti-biofilm medical devices: public health and regulatory science challenges. In Zhang Z, Victoria E. (editors) Antimicrobial Coatings and Modifications on Medical Devices Switzerland: Springer International Publishing; 2017; pp.37–65[Crossref]
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Khan ID, Basu A, Kiran S, Trivedi S, Pandit P et al. Device-associated healthcare-associated infections (DA-HAI) and the caveat of multiresistance in a multidisciplinary intensive care unit. Med J Armed Forces India 2016;73:222–231 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Tafin-Kampé K, Kamsu-Foguem B. Acute osteomyelitis due to Staphylococcus aureus in children: what is the status of treatment today?. Pediatr Infect Dis 2013;5:122–126 [CrossRef]
    [Google Scholar]
  10. O'Grady NP, Alexander M, Burns LA, Dellinger P, Garland J et al. Guidelines for the prevention of intravascular catheter-related infections. Clin Infect Dis 2011;52:e162–e193[Crossref]
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Galiczewski JM, Shurpin KM. An intervention to improve the catheter associated urinary tract infection rate in a medical intensive care unit: direct observation of catheter insertion procedure. Intensive Crit Care Nurs 2017;40:26–34 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Casey AL, Mermel LA, Nightingale P, Elliott TS. Antimicrobial central venous catheters in adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet Infect Dis 2008;8:763–776 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Kaali P, Strömberg E, Aune RE, Czél G, Momcilovic D et al. Antimicrobial properties of Ag+ loaded zeolite polyester polyurethane and silicone rubber and long-term properties after exposure to in-vitro ageing. Polym Degrad Stab 2010;95:1456–1465 [CrossRef]
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Weber DJ, Anderson D, Rutala WA. The role of the surface environment in healthcare-associated infections. Curr Opin Infect Dis 2013;26:338–344 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Darouiche RO. Prevention of infections associated with vascular catheters. Int J Artif Organs 2008;31:810–819[PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Darouiche RO, Raad II, Heard SO, Thornby JI, Wenker OC et al. A comparison of two antimicrobial-impregnated central venous catheters. N Engl J Med 1999;340:1–8 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Timsit JF, Dubois Y, Minet C, Bonadona A, Lugosi M et al. New materials and devices for preventing catheter-related infections. Ann Intensive Care 2011;1:34 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Gilbert RE, Mok Q, Dwan K, Harron K, Moitt T et al. Impregnated central venous catheters for prevention of bloodstream infection in children (the CATCH trial): a randomised controlled trial. The Lancet 2016;387:1732–1742 [CrossRef]
    [Google Scholar]
  19. McConnell SA, Gubbins PO, Anaissie EJ. Do antimicrobial-impregnated central venous catheters prevent catheter-related bloodstream infection?. Clin Infect Dis 2003;37:65–72 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Pickard R, Lam T, MacLennan G, Starr K, Kilonzo M et al. Antimicrobial catheters for reduction of symptomatic urinary tract infection in adults requiring short-term catheterisation in hospital: a multicentre randomised controlled trial. The Lancet 2012;380:1927–1935 [CrossRef]
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention 2017; Antibiotic/antimicrobial resistance. Available fromwww.cdc.gov/drugresistance/
  22. Lodise TP, Mckinnon PS. Burden of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus: focus on clinical and economic outcomes. Pharmacotherapy 2007;27:1001–1012 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Chung KK, Schumacher JF, Sampson EM, Burne RA, Antonelli PJ et al. Impact of engineered surface microtopography on biofilm formation of Staphylococcus aureus. Biointerphases 2007;2:89–94 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  24. Decker JT, Kirschner CM, Long CJ, Finlay JA, Callow ME et al. Engineered antifouling microtopographies: an energetic model that predicts cell attachment. Langmuir 2013;29:13023–13030 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  25. Schumacher JF, Carman ML, Estes TG, Feinberg AW, Wilson LH et al. Engineered antifouling microtopographies - effect of feature size, geometry, and roughness on settlement of zoospores of the green alga Ulva. Biofouling 2007;23:55–62 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  26. Choi L, Choudhri AF, Pillarisetty VG, Sampath LA, Caraos L et al. Development of an infection-resistant LVAD driveline: a novel approach to the prevention of device-related infections. J Heart Lung Transplant 1999;18:1103–1110 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  27. Mann EE, Manna D, Mettetal MR, May RM, Dannemiller EM et al. Surface micropattern limits bacterial contamination. Antimicrob Resist Infect Control 2014;3:28 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  28. von Bayern MP, Arrecubieta C, Oz S, Akashi H, Cedeiras M et al. Development of a murine ventricular assist device transcutaneous drive-line model. J Heart Lung Transplant 2008;27:812–814 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  29. Steven Leary WU, Anthony R, Cartner S, Corey D, Grandin T et al. AVMA Guidelines for the Euthanasia of Animals, 2013 ed. Schaumburg, IL: American Veterinary Medical Association; 2013
    [Google Scholar]
  30. Toba FA, Akashi H, Arrecubieta C, Lowy FD. Role of biofilm in Staphylococcus aureus and Staphylococcus epidermidis ventricular assist device driveline infections. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2011;141:1259–1264 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  31. Cotter JJ, Maguire P, Soberon F, Daniels S, O'Gara JP et al. Disinfection of meticillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus and Staphylococcus epidermidis biofilms using a remote non-thermal gas plasma. J Hosp Infect 2011;78:204–207 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  32. Drescher K, Shen Y, Bassler BL, Stone HA. Biofilm streamers cause catastrophic disruption of flow with consequences for environmental and medical systems. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2013;110:4345–4350 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  33. Coenye T, Nelis HJ. In vitro and in vivo model systems to study microbial biofilm formation. J Microbiol Methods 2010;83:89–105 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  34. Wiseman AC. Immunosuppressive medications. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol 2016;11:332–343 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  35. Carman ML, Estes TG, Feinberg AW, Schumacher JF, Wilkerson W et al. Engineered antifouling microtopographies–correlating wettability with cell attachment. Biofouling 2006;22:11–21 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  36. Williams GJ, Stickler DJ. Some observations on the migration of Proteus mirabilis and other urinary tract pathogens over foley catheters. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2008;29:443–445 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  37. Harkes G, Dankert J, Feijen J. Bacterial migration along solid surfaces. Appl Environ Microbiol 1992;58:1500–1505[PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  38. Darouiche RO, Safar H, Raad II. In vitro efficacy of antimicrobial-coated bladder catheters in inhibiting bacterial migration along catheter surface. J Infect Dis 1997;176:1109–1112 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  39. Darouiche RO. Device-associated infections: a macroproblem that starts with microadherence. Clin Infect Dis 2001;33:1567–1572 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  40. May RM, Magin CM, Mann EE, Drinker MC, Fraser JC et al. An engineered micropattern to reduce bacterial colonization, platelet adhesion and fibrin sheath formation for improved biocompatibility of central venous catheters. Clin Transl Med 2015;4:9 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  41. May RM, Hoffman MG, Sogo MJ, Parker AE, O'Toole GA et al. Micro-patterned surfaces reduce bacterial colonization and biofilm formation in vitro: potential for enhancing endotracheal tube designs. Clin Transl Med 2014;3:8 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  42. Reddy ST, Chung KK, Mcdaniel CJ, Darouiche RO, Landman J et al. Micropatterned surfaces for reducing the risk of catheter-associated urinary tract infection: an in vitro study on the effect of sharklet micropatterned surfaces to inhibit bacterial colonization and migration of uropathogenic Escherichia coli. J Endourol 2011;25:1547–1552 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journal/jmm/10.1099/jmm.0.000600
Loading
/content/journal/jmm/10.1099/jmm.0.000600
Loading

Data & Media loading...

Supplements

Supplementary File 1

PDF
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error