Skip to content
1887

Journal of Medical Microbiology logo Journal of Medical Microbiology

Volume 73, Issue 10

EDTA, aspirin and -mannose inhibit the biofilm formation of by hindering its adhesion to catheter devices: a proposed strategy for CAUTI prevention No Access

Abstract

Catheter-associated urinary tract infection (CAUTI) is a common nosocomial infection treated with antibiotics, but biofilm and antibiotic resistance have led researchers to seek preventive strategies rather than treatment.

No preventive strategy for CAUTI has been developed to date.

We studied the anti-biofilm potentials of three non-antibiotics to develop a strategy for CAUTI prevention.

Isolates were collected from urine specimens of catheterized inpatients; one of them was identified as ().

swarmed exhibiting a unique bull’s-eye pattern on the surface of 1.25% solidified agar, but it was not well-swarmer with distinguished swarming rafts on the surface of traditional media used for swarming (1.5%). EDTA, aspirin and -mannose significantly inhibited the biofilm-forming ability of on the surface of the urinary catheter device. EDTA was the strongest followed by aspirin and -mannose. The concentrations of drugs for 50% inhibition of biofilm (BIC) were estimated at ~0.2, 0.4 and 0.95 mM for EDTA, aspirin and -mannose, respectively. All drugs hindered cells from attaching to the catheter surface at the initiation stage of biofilm. The functional groups, –COOH for EDTA and aspirin, interfered with the cell adhesion process of through pili-to-surface interaction.

The inner surface of a urine drainage bag coated with EDTA, and the oral administration of aspirin and -mannose at their therapeutic doses would be an excellent preventive strategy for CAUTI.

  • Received:
  • Accepted:
  • Published Online:
Keyword(s): biofilm , CAUTI , inhibition , irreversible adhesion and Proteus
Funding
This study was supported by the:
  • Ministry of Science and Technology, Government of the People’s Republic of Bangladesh (Award SL. No. 495, Gr. SL. 99 Meds, 14 January 2019)
    • Principal Award Recipient: MonikaRani Saha
© 2024 The Authors
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journal/jmm/10.1099/jmm.0.001909
2024-10-18
2026-01-25

Metrics

Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Hooton TM, Bradley SF, Cardenas DD, Colgan R, Geerlings SE et al. Diagnosis, prevention, and treatment of catheter-associated urinary tract infection in adults: 2009 International Clinical Practice Guidelines from the Infectious Diseases Society of America. Clin Infect Dis 2010; 50:625–663 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  2. Siddiq DM, Darouiche RO. New strategies to prevent catheter-associated urinary tract infections. Nat Rev Urol 2012; 9:305–314 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  3. Hunter KF, Bharmal A, Moore KN. Long-term bladder drainage: Suprapubic catheter versus other methods: A scoping review. Neurourol Urodyn 2013; 32:944–951 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  4. Armbruster CE, Smith SN, Johnson AO, DeOrnellas V, Eaton KA et al. The pathogenic potential of Proteus mirabilis is enhanced by other uropathogens during polymicrobial urinary tract infection. Infect Immun 2017; 85:e00808–16 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  5. Naber KG, Bonkat G, Wagenlehner FME. The EAU and AUA/CUA/SUFU guidelines on recurrent urinary tract infections: what is the difference?. Eur Urol 2020; 78:645–646 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  6. Hrbacek J, Cermak P, Zachoval R. Current antibiotic resistance patterns of rare uropathogens: survey from Central European Urology Department 2011–2019. BMC Urol 2021; 21:61 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  7. Jones BV, Mahenthiralingam E, Stickler DJ. Role of swarming in the formation of crystalline Proteus mirabilis biofilms on urinary catheters. J Med Microbiol 2005; 54:807–813 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  8. Shigemura K, Arakawa S, Tanaka K, Fujisawa M. Clinical investigation of isolated bacteria from urinary tracts of hospitalized patients and their susceptibilities to antibiotics. J Infect Chemother 2009; 15:18–22 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  9. Delcaru C, Alexandru I, Podgoreanu P, Grosu M, Stavropoulos E et al. Microbial biofilms in urinary tract infections and prostatitis: etiology, pathogenicity, and combating strategies. Pathogens 2016; 5:65 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  10. Fu J, Zhang Y, Lin S, Zhang W, Shu G et al. Strategies for interfering with bacterial early stage biofilms. Front Microbiol 2021; 12:675843 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  11. Awtry EH, Loscalzo J. Aspirin. Circulation 2000; 101:1206–1218 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  12. Reardon DM, Warner B, Trowbridge EA. EDTA, the traditional anticoagulant of haematology: with increased automation is it time for a review?. Med Lab Sci 1991; 48:72–75 [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  13. Robertson EJ, Wolf JM, Casadevall A. EDTA inhibits biofilm formation, extracellular vesicular secretion, and shedding of the capsular polysaccharide glucuronoxylomannan by Cryptococcus neoformans. Appl Environ Microbiol 2012; 78:7977–7984 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  14. Finnegan S, Percival SL. EDTA: an antimicrobial and antibiofilm agent for use in wound care. Adv Wound Care 2015; 4:415–421 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  15. Liu F, Hansra S, Crockford G, Köster W, Allan BJ et al. Tetrasodium EDTA is effective at eradicating biofilms formed by clinically relevant microorganisms from patients’ central venous catheters. mSphere 2018; 3:e00525-18 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  16. Cattò C, Grazioso G, Dell’Orto S, Gelain A, Villa S et al. The response of Escherichia coli biofilm to salicylic acid. Biofouling 2017; 33:235–251 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  17. Muller E, Al-Attar J, Wolff AG, Farber BF. Mechanism of salicylate-mediated inhibition of biofilm in Staphylococcus epidermidis. J Infect Dis 1998; 177:501–503 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  18. Abidi SH, Ahmed K, Kazmi SU. The antibiofilm activity of acetylsalicylic acid, mefenamic acid, acetaminophen against biofilms formed by P. aeruginosa and S. epidermidis. J Pak Med Assoc 2019; 69:1 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  19. De Nunzio C, Bartoletti R, Tubaro A, Simonato A, Ficarra V. Role of D-mannose in the prevention of recurrent uncomplicated cystitis: state of the art and future perspectives. Antibiotics 2021; 10:373 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  20. Lenger SM, Bradley MS, Thomas DA, Bertolet MH, Lowder JL et al. D-mannose vs other agents for recurrent urinary tract infection prevention in adult women: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2020; 223:265 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  21. Zhang D, Chia C, Jiao X, Jin W, Kasagi S et al. D-mannose induces regulatory T cells and suppresses immunopathology. Nat Med 2017; 23:1036–1045 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  22. Scaglione F, Musazzi UM, Minghetti P. Considerations on D-mannose mechanism of action and consequent classification of marketed healthcare products. Front Pharmacol 2021; 12:636377 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  23. Sarshar M, Behzadi P, Ambrosi C, Zagaglia C, Palamara AT et al. FimH and anti-adhesive therapeutics: a disarming strategy against uropathogens. Antibiotics 2020; 9:397 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  24. Scribano D, Sarshar M, Prezioso C, Lucarelli M, Angeloni A et al. D-mannose treatment neither affects uropathogenic Escherichia coli properties nor induces stable FimH modifications. Molecules 2020; 25:316 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  25. Toyota S, Fukushi Y, Katoh S, Orikasa S, Suzuki Y. Anti-bacterial defense mechanism of the urinary bladder. Role of mannose in urine. Jpn J urol 1989; 80:1816–1823 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  26. Li X, Sun L, Zhang P, Wang Y. Novel approaches to combat medical device-associated biofilms. Coatings 2021; 11:294 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  27. Li Y, Li X, Hao Y, Liu Y, Dong Z et al. Biological and physiochemical methods of biofilm adhesion resistance control of medical-context surface. Int J Biol Sci 2021; 17:1769–1781 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  28. Filipiak A, Chrapek M, Literacka E, Wawszczak M, Głuszek S et al. Pathogenic factors correlate with antimicrobial resistance among clinical Proteus mirabilis strains. Front Microbiol 2020; 11:579389 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  29. Roy R, Tiwari M, Donelli G, Tiwari V. Strategies for combating bacterial biofilms: A focus on anti-biofilm agents and their mechanisms of action. Virulence 2018; 9:522–554 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  30. Abebe GM. The role of bacterial biofilm in antibiotic resistance and food contamination. Int J Microbiol 2020; 2020:1705814 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  31. Karygianni L, Ren Z, Koo H, Thurnheer T. Biofilm matrixome: extracellular components in structured microbial communities. Trends Microbiol 2020; 28:668–681 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  32. Parastan R, Kargar M, Solhjoo K, Kafilzadeh F. Staphylococcus aureus biofilms: structures, antibiotic resistance, inhibition, and vaccines. Gene Rep 2020; 20:100739 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  33. Chouduri AU, Wadud A. Twitching motility, biofilm communities in cephalosporin resistant Proteus spp and the best in vitro amoxicillin susceptibility to isolates. Am J Microbiol Res 2014; 2:8–15 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  34. O’Hara CM, Brenner FW, Miller JM. Classification, identification, and clinical significance of Proteus, Providencia, and Morganella. Clin Microbiol Rev 2000; 13:534–546 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  35. Yang A, Tang WS, Si T, Tang JX. Influence of physical effects on the swarming motility of Pseudomonas aeruginosa. Biophys J 2017; 112:1462–1471 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  36. Kaiser D. Bacterial swarming: A re-examination of cell-movement patterns. Curr Biol 2007; 17:R561–70 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  37. Armbruster CE, Hodges SA, Mobley HLT. Initiation of swarming motility by Proteus mirabilis occurs in response to specific cues present in urine and requires excess L-glutamine. J Bacteriol 2013; 195:1305–1319 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  38. Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI) Performance standards for antimicrobial susceptibility testing. M100, March 2021;Ed.31; 2021 p 293
  39. Kwon M, Hussain MS, Oh DH. Biofilm formation of Bacillus cereus under food-processing-related conditions. Food Sci Biotechnol 2017; 26:1103–1111 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  40. Deighton MA, Capstick J, Domalewski E, van Nguyen T. Methods for studying biofilms produced by Staphylococcus epidermidis. Methods Enzymol 2001; 336:177–195 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  41. Aiassa V, Barnes AI, Albesa I. Macromolecular oxidation in planktonic population and biofilms of Proteus mirabilis exposed to ciprofloxacin. Cell Biochem Biophys 2014; 68:49–54 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  42. Donlan RM. Biofilms: microbial life on surfaces. Emerg Infect Dis 2002; 8:881–890 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  43. Downer A, Morris N, Feast WJ, Stickler D. Polymer surface properties and their effect on the adhesion of Proteus mirabilis. Proc Inst Mech Eng H 2003; 217:279–289 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  44. Kearns DB. A field guide to bacterial swarming motility. Nat Rev Microbiol 2010; 8:634–644 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  45. Durgadevi R, Abirami G, Alexpandi R, Nandhini K, Kumar P et al. Explication of the potential of 2-Hydroxy-4-methoxybenzaldehyde in hampering uropathogenic Proteus mirabilis crystalline biofilm and virulence. Front Microbiol 2019; 10:2804 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  46. Jones BV, Young R, Mahenthiralingam E, Stickler DJ. Ultrastructure of Proteus mirabilis swarmer cell rafts and role of swarming in catheter-associated urinary tract infection. Infect Immun 2004; 72:3941–3950 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  47. Abdel-Rhman SH, Rizk DE, Abdelmegeed ES. Effect of sub-minimum inhibitory concentrations of tyrosol and EDTA on quorum sensing and virulence of Pseudomonas aeruginosa. Infect Drug Resist 2020; 13:3501–3511 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  48. Abbas HA. Ambroxol blocks swarming and swimming motilities and inhibits biofilm formation by Proteus mirabilis isolated from diabetic foot infection. Asian J Pharma Technolo 2013; 3:109–116
     [Google Scholar]
  49. Daniels R, Vanderleyden J, Michiels J. Quorum sensing and swarming migration in bacteria. FEMS Microbiol Rev 2004; 28:261–289 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  50. Chow S, Gu K, Jiang L, Nassour A. Salicylic acid affects swimming, twitching and swarming motility in Pseudomonas aeruginosa, resulting in decreased biofilm formation. J Experiment Microbiol Immunol 2011; 15:22–29
     [Google Scholar]
  51. Mittal S, Sharma M, Chaudhary U. Biofilm and multidrug resistance in uropathogenic Escherichia coli. Pathog Glob Health 2015; 109:26–29 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  52. Garousi M, Monazami Tabar S, Mirazi H, Asgari P, Sabeghi P et al. A global systematic review and meta-analysis on correlation between biofilm producers and non-biofilm producers with antibiotic resistance in uropathogenic Escherichia coli. Microb Pathog 2022; 164:105412 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  53. Okaro U, Green R, Mohapatra S, Anderson B. The trimeric autotransporter adhesin BadA is required for in vitro biofilm formation by Bartonella henselae. NPJ Biofilms Microbiomes 2019; 5:10 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  54. Chang Y, Gu W, McLandsborough L. Low concentration of ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA) affects biofilm formation of Listeria monocytogenes by inhibiting its initial adherence. Food Microbiol 2012; 29:10–17 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  55. Matsukawa T, Ikeda S, Imai H, Yamada M. Alleviation of the two-cell block of ICR mouse embryos by polyaminocarboxylate metal chelators. Reproduction 2002; 124:65–71 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  56. Alakomi HL, Saarela M, Helander IM. Effect of EDTA on Salmonella enterica serovar Typhimurium involves a component not assignable to lipopolysaccharide release. Microbiology 2003; 149:2015–2021 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  57. Paes Leme RC, da Silva RB. Antimicrobial activity of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs on biofilm: current evidence and potential for drug repurposing. Front Microbiol 2021; 12:707629 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  58. Wang WH, Wong WM, Dailidiene D, Berg DE, Gu Q et al. Aspirin inhibits the growth of Helicobacter pylori and enhances its susceptibility to antimicrobial agents. Gut 2003; 52:490–495 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  59. Alem MAS, Douglas LJ. Effects of aspirin and other nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs on biofilms and planktonic cells of Candida albicans. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2004; 48:41–47 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  60. Demirag MK, Esen S, Zivalioglu M, Leblebicioglu H, Keceligil HT. The effect of aspirin on adherence of slime-producing, coagulase-negative Staphylococci to vascular grafts. Ann Vasc Surg 2007; 21:464–467 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  61. Arif H, Aggarwal S. Salicylic Acid (Aspirin); StatPearls Publishing LLC Tampa, FL, USA: St. Petersburg, Russia; 2019
     [Google Scholar]
  62. Di Bella S, Luzzati R, Principe L, Zerbato V, Meroni E et al. Aspirin and infection: A narrative review. Biomedicines 2022; 10:263 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  63. Phe V, Pakzad M, Haslam C, Gonzales G, Curtis C et al. An open label feasibility study evaluating d-mannose for the prevention of urinary tract infections in patients with multiple sclerosis. Neurouro Urodyna 2016; 35:S443–S444
     [Google Scholar]
  64. Wellens A, Garofalo C, Nguyen H, Van Gerven N, Slättegård R et al. Intervening with urinary tract infections using anti-adhesives based on the crystal structure of the FimH-oligomannose-3 complex. PLoS One 2008; 3:e2040 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  65. Sharon N. Carbohydrates as future anti-adhesion drugs for infectious diseases. Biochem Biophys Act-Gene Subj 2006; 1760:527–537 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  66. Sharma V, Ichikawa M, Freeze HH. Mannose metabolism: more than meets the eye. Biochem Biophys Res Commun 2014; 453:220–228 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  67. Ala-Jaakkola R, Laitila A, Ouwehand AC, Lehtoranta L. Role of D-mannose in urinary tract infections - a narrative review. Nutr J 2022; 21:18 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  68. Chen CL, Dudek A, Liang YH, Janapatla RP, Lee HY et al. D-mannose-sensitive pilus of Acinetobacter baumannii is linked to biofilm formation and adherence onto respiratory tract epithelial cells. J Microbiol Immunol Infect 2022; 55:69–79 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  69. Kranjčec B, Papeš D, Altarac S. D-mannose powder for prophylaxis of recurrent urinary tract infections in women: a randomized clinical trial. World J Urol 2014; 32:79–84 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  70. Kyriakides R, Jones P, Somani BK. Role of D-mannose in the prevention of recurrent urinary tract infections: evidence from a systematic review of the literature. Eur Urol Focus 2021; 7:1166–1169 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  71. Loubet P, Ranfaing J, Dinh A, Dunyach-Remy C, Bernard L et al. Alternative therapeutic options to antibiotics for the treatment of urinary tract infections. Front Microbiol 2020; 11:1509 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  72. Bouckaert J, Berglund J, Schembri M, De Genst E, Cools L et al. Receptor binding studies disclose a novel class of high-affinity inhibitors of the Escherichia coli FimH adhesin. Mol Microbiol 2005; 55:441–455 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  73. Chan AKY, Tsang YC, Chu CH, Tsang CSP. Aspirin as an antifungal-lock agent in inhibition of candidal biofilm formation in surgical catheters. Infect Drug Resist 2021; 14:1427–1433 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  74. Pani A, Valeria L, Dugnani S, Senatore M, Scaglione F. Pharmacodynamics of D-mannose in the prevention of recurrent urinary infections. J Chemother 2022; 34:459–464 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  75. Al-Bakri AG, Othman G, Bustanji Y. The assessment of the antibacterial and antifungal activities of aspirin, EDTA and aspirin-EDTA combination and their effectiveness as antibiofilm agents. J Appl Microbiol 2009; 107:280–286 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  76. Katsikogianni M, Missirlis YF. Concise review of mechanisms of bacterial adhesion to biomaterials and of techniques used in estimating bacteria-material interactions. Eur Cell Mater 2004; 8:37–57 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  77. Cerca N, Martins S, Pier GB, Oliveira R, Azeredo J. The relationship between inhibition of bacterial adhesion to a solid surface by sub-MICs of antibiotics and subsequent development of a biofilm. Res Microbiol 2005; 156:650–655 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  78. Kinnari TJ, Peltonen LI, Kuusela P, Kivilahti J, Könönen M et al. Bacterial adherence to titanium surface coated with human serum albumin. Otol Neurotol 2005; 26:380–384 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  79. Asadi A, Razavi S, Talebi M, Gholami M. A review on anti-adhesion therapies of bacterial diseases. Infection 2019; 47:13–23 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  80. Sihra N, Goodman A, Zakri R, Sahai A, Malde S. Nonantibiotic prevention and management of recurrent urinary tract infection. Nat Rev Urol 2018; 15:750–776 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
/content/journal/jmm/10.1099/jmm.0.001909
Loading
EDTA, aspirin and d-mannose inhibit the biofilm formation of Proteus vulgaris by hindering its adhesion to catheter devices: a proposed strategy for CAUTI prevention
J. Med. Microbiol. 73, 001909 (2024); https://doi.org/10.1099/jmm.0.001909
/content/journal/jmm/10.1099/jmm.0.001909
/content/journal/jmm/10.1099/jmm.0.001909
Loading

Data & Media loading...

Supplements

Supplementary material 1

PDF

Most cited Most Cited RSS feed

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