阴茎假体的抗微生物药物耐药性和生物膜形成:来自体外分析的见解。

IF 3.3 3区 医学 Q1 UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY
Bradley J Roth, Prajit Khooblall, Navid Leelani, Mangesh Suryavanshi, Andrew Shumaker, Glenn Werneburg, Aaron Miller, Petar Bajic
{"title":"阴茎假体的抗微生物药物耐药性和生物膜形成:来自体外分析的见解。","authors":"Bradley J Roth, Prajit Khooblall, Navid Leelani, Mangesh Suryavanshi, Andrew Shumaker, Glenn Werneburg, Aaron Miller, Petar Bajic","doi":"10.1093/jsxmed/qdaf001","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Inflatable penile prostheses (IPPs) have been shown to harbor biofilms in the presence and absence of infection despite exposure to various antimicrobials. Microbes persisting on IPPs following antibiotic exposure have not been adequately studied to assess biofilm formation capacity and antibiotic resistance.</p><p><strong>Aim: </strong>In this study, we aimed to assess these properties of microbes obtained from explanted infected and non-infected IPPS using an in vitro model.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>35 bacterial isolates were grown and tested against various single-agent or multiple agent antibiotic regimens including: bacitracin, cefaclor, cefazolin, gentamicin, levofloxacin, trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole, tobramycin, vancomycin, piperacillin/tazobactam, gentamicin + piperacillin/tazobactam, gentamicin + cefazolin, and gentamicin + vancomycin. Zones of inhibition were averaged for each sample site and species. Statistics were analyzed with Holm's corrected, one-sample t-tests against a null hypothesis of 0. Isolates were also allowed to form biofilms in a 96-well polyvinyl plate and absorbance was tested at 570 nm using a microplate reader.</p><p><strong>Outcomes: </strong>Resistance was determined via clinical guidelines or previously established literature, and the mean and standard deviation of biofilm absorbance values were calculated and normalized to the optical density600 of the bacterial inoculum.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Every species tested was able to form robust biofilms with the exception of Staphylococcus warneri. As expected, most bacteria were resistant to common perioperative antimicrobial prophylaxis. Gentamicin dual therapy demonstrated somewhat greater efficacy.</p><p><strong>Strengths and limitations: </strong>This study examines a broad range of antimicrobials against clinically obtained bacterial isolates. However, not all species and antibiotics tested had standardized breakpoints, requiring the use of surrogate values from the literature. The microbes included in this study and their resistance genes are expectedly biased towards those that survived antibiotic exposure, and thus reflect the types of microbes which might \"survive\" in vivo exposure following revisional surgery.</p><p><strong>Clinical translation: </strong>Despite exposure to antimicrobials, bacteria isolated during penile prosthesis revision for both infected and non-infected cases exhibit biofilm forming capacity and extensive antibiotic resistance patterns in vitro. These microbes merit further investigation to understand when simple colonization vs re-infection might occur.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Although increasing evidence supports the concept that all IPPs harbor biofilms, even in the absence of infection, a deeper understanding of the characteristics of bacteria that survive revisional surgery is warranted. This study demonstrated extensive biofilm forming capabilities, and resistance patterns among bacteria isolated from both non-infected and infected IPP revision surgeries. Further investigation is warranted to determine why some devices become infected while others remain colonized but non-infected.</p>","PeriodicalId":51100,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Sexual Medicine","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Antimicrobial resistance and biofilm formation of penile prosthesis isolates: insights from in-vitro analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Bradley J Roth, Prajit Khooblall, Navid Leelani, Mangesh Suryavanshi, Andrew Shumaker, Glenn Werneburg, Aaron Miller, Petar Bajic\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/jsxmed/qdaf001\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Inflatable penile prostheses (IPPs) have been shown to harbor biofilms in the presence and absence of infection despite exposure to various antimicrobials. Microbes persisting on IPPs following antibiotic exposure have not been adequately studied to assess biofilm formation capacity and antibiotic resistance.</p><p><strong>Aim: </strong>In this study, we aimed to assess these properties of microbes obtained from explanted infected and non-infected IPPS using an in vitro model.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>35 bacterial isolates were grown and tested against various single-agent or multiple agent antibiotic regimens including: bacitracin, cefaclor, cefazolin, gentamicin, levofloxacin, trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole, tobramycin, vancomycin, piperacillin/tazobactam, gentamicin + piperacillin/tazobactam, gentamicin + cefazolin, and gentamicin + vancomycin. Zones of inhibition were averaged for each sample site and species. Statistics were analyzed with Holm's corrected, one-sample t-tests against a null hypothesis of 0. Isolates were also allowed to form biofilms in a 96-well polyvinyl plate and absorbance was tested at 570 nm using a microplate reader.</p><p><strong>Outcomes: </strong>Resistance was determined via clinical guidelines or previously established literature, and the mean and standard deviation of biofilm absorbance values were calculated and normalized to the optical density600 of the bacterial inoculum.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Every species tested was able to form robust biofilms with the exception of Staphylococcus warneri. As expected, most bacteria were resistant to common perioperative antimicrobial prophylaxis. Gentamicin dual therapy demonstrated somewhat greater efficacy.</p><p><strong>Strengths and limitations: </strong>This study examines a broad range of antimicrobials against clinically obtained bacterial isolates. However, not all species and antibiotics tested had standardized breakpoints, requiring the use of surrogate values from the literature. The microbes included in this study and their resistance genes are expectedly biased towards those that survived antibiotic exposure, and thus reflect the types of microbes which might \\\"survive\\\" in vivo exposure following revisional surgery.</p><p><strong>Clinical translation: </strong>Despite exposure to antimicrobials, bacteria isolated during penile prosthesis revision for both infected and non-infected cases exhibit biofilm forming capacity and extensive antibiotic resistance patterns in vitro. These microbes merit further investigation to understand when simple colonization vs re-infection might occur.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Although increasing evidence supports the concept that all IPPs harbor biofilms, even in the absence of infection, a deeper understanding of the characteristics of bacteria that survive revisional surgery is warranted. This study demonstrated extensive biofilm forming capabilities, and resistance patterns among bacteria isolated from both non-infected and infected IPP revision surgeries. Further investigation is warranted to determine why some devices become infected while others remain colonized but non-infected.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":51100,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Sexual Medicine\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-03-10\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Sexual Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/jsxmed/qdaf001\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Sexual Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jsxmed/qdaf001","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:充气阴茎假体(ipp)已被证明在存在和不存在感染的情况下,尽管暴露于各种抗菌素,仍有生物膜。抗生素暴露后在ipp上持续存在的微生物尚未得到充分的研究,以评估生物膜形成能力和抗生素耐药性。目的:在本研究中,我们旨在利用体外模型评估从外植的感染和未感染的IPPS中获得的微生物的这些特性。方法:培养35株分离菌,对细菌霉素、头孢克洛、头孢唑林、庆大霉素、左氧氟沙星、甲氧苄啶-磺胺恶唑、妥布霉素、万古霉素、哌拉西林/他唑巴坦、庆大霉素+哌拉西林/他唑巴坦、庆大霉素+头孢唑林、庆大霉素+万古霉素等多种单药或多药抗生素方案进行耐药性试验。对每个样品位置和物种的抑制区进行平均。统计数据用霍尔姆修正后的单样本t检验对零假设进行分析。分离物也被允许在96孔聚氯乙烯板中形成生物膜,并使用微孔板读取器在570 nm处测试吸光度。结果:通过临床指南或先前建立的文献确定耐药性,计算生物膜吸光度值的平均值和标准差,并归一化为细菌接种物的光密度600。结果:除沃氏葡萄球菌外,每一种细菌都能形成坚固的生物膜。正如预期的那样,大多数细菌对常见的围手术期抗菌预防药物具有耐药性。庆大霉素双重治疗显示出更大的疗效。优势和局限性:本研究对临床获得的细菌分离物进行了广泛的抗菌剂研究。然而,并非所有被测试的物种和抗生素都有标准化的断点,需要使用文献中的替代值。本研究中包括的微生物及其耐药基因预期偏向于那些在抗生素暴露中存活下来的微生物,因此反映了在翻修手术后可能在体内暴露中“存活”的微生物类型。临床翻译:尽管暴露于抗菌剂,在阴茎假体翻修期间分离的细菌感染和非感染病例在体外表现出生物膜形成能力和广泛的抗生素耐药性模式。这些微生物值得进一步研究,以了解何时可能发生简单定植和再次感染。结论:尽管越来越多的证据支持所有ipp都有生物膜的概念,即使在没有感染的情况下,但对修复手术中存活的细菌特征的更深入了解是有必要的。这项研究证明了广泛的生物膜形成能力,以及从未感染和感染的IPP翻修手术中分离的细菌的耐药性模式。有必要进一步调查,以确定为什么有些设备被感染,而另一些设备仍有定植但未被感染。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Antimicrobial resistance and biofilm formation of penile prosthesis isolates: insights from in-vitro analysis.

Background: Inflatable penile prostheses (IPPs) have been shown to harbor biofilms in the presence and absence of infection despite exposure to various antimicrobials. Microbes persisting on IPPs following antibiotic exposure have not been adequately studied to assess biofilm formation capacity and antibiotic resistance.

Aim: In this study, we aimed to assess these properties of microbes obtained from explanted infected and non-infected IPPS using an in vitro model.

Methods: 35 bacterial isolates were grown and tested against various single-agent or multiple agent antibiotic regimens including: bacitracin, cefaclor, cefazolin, gentamicin, levofloxacin, trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole, tobramycin, vancomycin, piperacillin/tazobactam, gentamicin + piperacillin/tazobactam, gentamicin + cefazolin, and gentamicin + vancomycin. Zones of inhibition were averaged for each sample site and species. Statistics were analyzed with Holm's corrected, one-sample t-tests against a null hypothesis of 0. Isolates were also allowed to form biofilms in a 96-well polyvinyl plate and absorbance was tested at 570 nm using a microplate reader.

Outcomes: Resistance was determined via clinical guidelines or previously established literature, and the mean and standard deviation of biofilm absorbance values were calculated and normalized to the optical density600 of the bacterial inoculum.

Results: Every species tested was able to form robust biofilms with the exception of Staphylococcus warneri. As expected, most bacteria were resistant to common perioperative antimicrobial prophylaxis. Gentamicin dual therapy demonstrated somewhat greater efficacy.

Strengths and limitations: This study examines a broad range of antimicrobials against clinically obtained bacterial isolates. However, not all species and antibiotics tested had standardized breakpoints, requiring the use of surrogate values from the literature. The microbes included in this study and their resistance genes are expectedly biased towards those that survived antibiotic exposure, and thus reflect the types of microbes which might "survive" in vivo exposure following revisional surgery.

Clinical translation: Despite exposure to antimicrobials, bacteria isolated during penile prosthesis revision for both infected and non-infected cases exhibit biofilm forming capacity and extensive antibiotic resistance patterns in vitro. These microbes merit further investigation to understand when simple colonization vs re-infection might occur.

Conclusions: Although increasing evidence supports the concept that all IPPs harbor biofilms, even in the absence of infection, a deeper understanding of the characteristics of bacteria that survive revisional surgery is warranted. This study demonstrated extensive biofilm forming capabilities, and resistance patterns among bacteria isolated from both non-infected and infected IPP revision surgeries. Further investigation is warranted to determine why some devices become infected while others remain colonized but non-infected.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Sexual Medicine
Journal of Sexual Medicine 医学-泌尿学与肾脏学
CiteScore
6.20
自引率
5.70%
发文量
826
审稿时长
2-4 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Sexual Medicine publishes multidisciplinary basic science and clinical research to define and understand the scientific basis of male, female, and couples sexual function and dysfunction. As an official journal of the International Society for Sexual Medicine and the International Society for the Study of Women''s Sexual Health, it provides healthcare professionals in sexual medicine with essential educational content and promotes the exchange of scientific information generated from experimental and clinical research. The Journal of Sexual Medicine includes basic science and clinical research studies in the psychologic and biologic aspects of male, female, and couples sexual function and dysfunction, and highlights new observations and research, results with innovative treatments and all other topics relevant to clinical sexual medicine. The objective of The Journal of Sexual Medicine is to serve as an interdisciplinary forum to integrate the exchange among disciplines concerned with the whole field of human sexuality. The journal accomplishes this objective by publishing original articles, as well as other scientific and educational documents that support the mission of the International Society for Sexual Medicine.
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信