What Are the Optimal Irrigating Wound Vacuum Parameters When Using Bacteriophage Therapeutics?

IF 1.4 4区 医学 Q4 INFECTIOUS DISEASES
Nazary Nebeluk, Daria Van Tyne, Kapil Saharia, James B Doub
{"title":"What Are the Optimal Irrigating Wound Vacuum Parameters When Using Bacteriophage Therapeutics?","authors":"Nazary Nebeluk, Daria Van Tyne, Kapil Saharia, James B Doub","doi":"10.1089/sur.2025.029","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b><i>Objective:</i></b> Bacteriophages are promising adjuvant anti-biofilm agents. Yet novel ways to repeatedly administer bacteriophages in vivo are needed. One technique utilizes irrigating wound vacuum systems. However, the proper parameters to use with bacteriophages are poorly defined. Therefore, the objective of this study was to elucidate proper bacteriophage irrigating vacuum parameters. <b><i>Methods:</i></b> Individual <i>Pseudomonas aeruginosa</i> and <i>Staphylococcus aureus</i> clinical isolates were allowed to form biofilms in microwell plates and then exposed to repeated irrigations with saline or with bacteriophages over 8 hours. The repeated irrigations corresponded to theoretical different dwell times of the irrigating vacuum system. Residual biofilm mass was compared among groups by staining with crystal violet and measuring optical density. <b><i>Results:</i></b> As the number of saline irrigations increased, there was less biofilm burden, and this was substantially less than growth controls (p < 0.05). When compared with saline, bacteriophages substantially reduced biofilms except for the <i>P. aeruginosa</i> bacteriophage at dwell times of 20 minutes. Furthermore, bacteriophages caused no observable colony forming units per milliliter for all dwell times except 20-minute dwell times, and this was statistically significant (p < 0.05) when compared with saline infusions. <b><i>Conclusions:</i></b> Frequent irrigation with shorter dwell times facilitates biofilm disruption and reduces bacterial burden. However, if dwell times are too short, bacteriophages may not have sufficient time to hydrolyze biofilm and to infect and kill bacteria. On the basis of our model, we propose a minimum of 1 hour dwell time but appreciate that more translational research is needed to refine these approaches.</p>","PeriodicalId":22109,"journal":{"name":"Surgical infections","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Surgical infections","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1089/sur.2025.029","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"INFECTIOUS DISEASES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: Bacteriophages are promising adjuvant anti-biofilm agents. Yet novel ways to repeatedly administer bacteriophages in vivo are needed. One technique utilizes irrigating wound vacuum systems. However, the proper parameters to use with bacteriophages are poorly defined. Therefore, the objective of this study was to elucidate proper bacteriophage irrigating vacuum parameters. Methods: Individual Pseudomonas aeruginosa and Staphylococcus aureus clinical isolates were allowed to form biofilms in microwell plates and then exposed to repeated irrigations with saline or with bacteriophages over 8 hours. The repeated irrigations corresponded to theoretical different dwell times of the irrigating vacuum system. Residual biofilm mass was compared among groups by staining with crystal violet and measuring optical density. Results: As the number of saline irrigations increased, there was less biofilm burden, and this was substantially less than growth controls (p < 0.05). When compared with saline, bacteriophages substantially reduced biofilms except for the P. aeruginosa bacteriophage at dwell times of 20 minutes. Furthermore, bacteriophages caused no observable colony forming units per milliliter for all dwell times except 20-minute dwell times, and this was statistically significant (p < 0.05) when compared with saline infusions. Conclusions: Frequent irrigation with shorter dwell times facilitates biofilm disruption and reduces bacterial burden. However, if dwell times are too short, bacteriophages may not have sufficient time to hydrolyze biofilm and to infect and kill bacteria. On the basis of our model, we propose a minimum of 1 hour dwell time but appreciate that more translational research is needed to refine these approaches.

使用噬菌体治疗时,冲洗伤口的最佳真空参数是什么?
目的:噬菌体是一种很有前途的抗生物膜佐剂。然而,需要在体内重复施用噬菌体的新方法。一种技术利用冲洗伤口真空系统。然而,用于噬菌体的适当参数还没有明确定义。因此,本研究的目的是阐明合适的噬菌体灌洗真空参数。方法:单个铜绿假单胞菌和金黄色葡萄球菌临床分离株在微孔板上形成生物膜,然后用生理盐水或噬菌体反复冲洗8小时。重复灌水对应于灌水真空系统理论上不同的停留时间。通过结晶紫染色和测定光密度比较各组剩余生物膜质量。结果:随着盐水冲洗次数的增加,生物膜负荷减少,明显低于生长对照组(p < 0.05)。与生理盐水相比,除了铜绿假单胞菌(P. aeruginosa)噬菌体外,在20分钟的停留时间内,噬菌体显著减少了生物膜。此外,在除20分钟外的所有静置时间内,噬菌体均未造成每毫升菌落形成单位,与生理盐水输注相比,这一结果具有统计学意义(p < 0.05)。结论:频繁的冲洗和较短的停留时间有利于生物膜的破坏,减少细菌负担。然而,如果停留时间太短,噬菌体可能没有足够的时间水解生物膜,感染和杀死细菌。在我们的模型的基础上,我们建议至少1小时的停留时间,但认识到需要更多的转化研究来完善这些方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Surgical infections
Surgical infections INFECTIOUS DISEASES-SURGERY
CiteScore
3.80
自引率
5.00%
发文量
127
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Surgical Infections provides comprehensive and authoritative information on the biology, prevention, and management of post-operative infections. Original articles cover the latest advancements, new therapeutic management strategies, and translational research that is being applied to improve clinical outcomes and successfully treat post-operative infections. Surgical Infections coverage includes: -Peritonitis and intra-abdominal infections- Surgical site infections- Pneumonia and other nosocomial infections- Cellular and humoral immunity- Biology of the host response- Organ dysfunction syndromes- Antibiotic use- Resistant and opportunistic pathogens- Epidemiology and prevention- The operating room environment- Diagnostic studies
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信