Caroline A de Jongh, Laura Volle, Chen Sun, Dongmei Deng, Michel A Hoogenkamp, Kamran Nazmi, Floris J Bikker, Bastiaan P Krom
{"title":"抗生素保护试验再访:甲硝唑不能完全消除牙龈卟啉单胞菌。","authors":"Caroline A de Jongh, Laura Volle, Chen Sun, Dongmei Deng, Michel A Hoogenkamp, Kamran Nazmi, Floris J Bikker, Bastiaan P Krom","doi":"10.1016/j.mimet.2025.107214","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Intracellular bacterial survival is widely studied in host-microbiome interactions. The antibiotic protection assay is often used to quantify intracellular bacteria. This method uses gentamicin to kill extracellular bacteria, where the bacteria that remain inside host cells survive the treatment. However, gentamicin is ineffective against anaerobic bacteria, such as Porphyromonas gingivalis. To remedy this, metronidazole is often incorporated. However, the effectiveness of this adaptation seems not to be validated properly. The aim of this study was to show the ineffectiveness of metronidazole to eliminate extracellular P. gingivalis in vitro. Microscopy showed uptake of P. gingivalis by murine J774A.1 macrophages and primary human macrophages. However, quantification of intracellular bacteria was unreliable as the control without macrophages contained significant numbers of viable bacteria. Upon testing metronidazole under assay conditions, P. gingivalis survived within the tested timeframes. Next, it was attempted to find a suitable alternative antibiotic compound to use in the antibiotic protection assay. The MIC and MBC were therefore determined for various alternative antibiotics and antimicrobial peptides. None of the included antibiotics effectively killed P. gingivalis. Antimicrobial peptides cycloLL-37 and D-LL-31 were effective against P. gingivalis, but were toxic to macrophages under the conditions used as determined using a Lactate dehydrogenase-based cytotoxicity assay. To conclude, metronidazole and gentamicin seem unsuitable for the antibiotic protection assay for the strict anaerobic oral bacterium P. gingivalis. To be able to determine viable intracellular P. gingivalis, alternative bactericidal agents should be found which, under assay conditions, eliminate extracellular P. gingivalis without entering or affecting mammalian cells.</p>","PeriodicalId":16409,"journal":{"name":"Journal of microbiological methods","volume":" ","pages":"107214"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Antibiotic protection assay revisited: Metronidazole is unable to completely eliminate Porphyromonas gingivalis.\",\"authors\":\"Caroline A de Jongh, Laura Volle, Chen Sun, Dongmei Deng, Michel A Hoogenkamp, Kamran Nazmi, Floris J Bikker, Bastiaan P Krom\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.mimet.2025.107214\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Intracellular bacterial survival is widely studied in host-microbiome interactions. The antibiotic protection assay is often used to quantify intracellular bacteria. This method uses gentamicin to kill extracellular bacteria, where the bacteria that remain inside host cells survive the treatment. However, gentamicin is ineffective against anaerobic bacteria, such as Porphyromonas gingivalis. To remedy this, metronidazole is often incorporated. However, the effectiveness of this adaptation seems not to be validated properly. The aim of this study was to show the ineffectiveness of metronidazole to eliminate extracellular P. gingivalis in vitro. Microscopy showed uptake of P. gingivalis by murine J774A.1 macrophages and primary human macrophages. However, quantification of intracellular bacteria was unreliable as the control without macrophages contained significant numbers of viable bacteria. Upon testing metronidazole under assay conditions, P. gingivalis survived within the tested timeframes. Next, it was attempted to find a suitable alternative antibiotic compound to use in the antibiotic protection assay. The MIC and MBC were therefore determined for various alternative antibiotics and antimicrobial peptides. None of the included antibiotics effectively killed P. gingivalis. Antimicrobial peptides cycloLL-37 and D-LL-31 were effective against P. gingivalis, but were toxic to macrophages under the conditions used as determined using a Lactate dehydrogenase-based cytotoxicity assay. To conclude, metronidazole and gentamicin seem unsuitable for the antibiotic protection assay for the strict anaerobic oral bacterium P. gingivalis. To be able to determine viable intracellular P. gingivalis, alternative bactericidal agents should be found which, under assay conditions, eliminate extracellular P. gingivalis without entering or affecting mammalian cells.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":16409,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of microbiological methods\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"107214\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of microbiological methods\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"99\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mimet.2025.107214\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"生物学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/8/6 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"BIOCHEMICAL RESEARCH METHODS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of microbiological methods","FirstCategoryId":"99","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mimet.2025.107214","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"生物学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/8/6 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"BIOCHEMICAL RESEARCH METHODS","Score":null,"Total":0}
Antibiotic protection assay revisited: Metronidazole is unable to completely eliminate Porphyromonas gingivalis.
Intracellular bacterial survival is widely studied in host-microbiome interactions. The antibiotic protection assay is often used to quantify intracellular bacteria. This method uses gentamicin to kill extracellular bacteria, where the bacteria that remain inside host cells survive the treatment. However, gentamicin is ineffective against anaerobic bacteria, such as Porphyromonas gingivalis. To remedy this, metronidazole is often incorporated. However, the effectiveness of this adaptation seems not to be validated properly. The aim of this study was to show the ineffectiveness of metronidazole to eliminate extracellular P. gingivalis in vitro. Microscopy showed uptake of P. gingivalis by murine J774A.1 macrophages and primary human macrophages. However, quantification of intracellular bacteria was unreliable as the control without macrophages contained significant numbers of viable bacteria. Upon testing metronidazole under assay conditions, P. gingivalis survived within the tested timeframes. Next, it was attempted to find a suitable alternative antibiotic compound to use in the antibiotic protection assay. The MIC and MBC were therefore determined for various alternative antibiotics and antimicrobial peptides. None of the included antibiotics effectively killed P. gingivalis. Antimicrobial peptides cycloLL-37 and D-LL-31 were effective against P. gingivalis, but were toxic to macrophages under the conditions used as determined using a Lactate dehydrogenase-based cytotoxicity assay. To conclude, metronidazole and gentamicin seem unsuitable for the antibiotic protection assay for the strict anaerobic oral bacterium P. gingivalis. To be able to determine viable intracellular P. gingivalis, alternative bactericidal agents should be found which, under assay conditions, eliminate extracellular P. gingivalis without entering or affecting mammalian cells.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Microbiological Methods publishes scholarly and original articles, notes and review articles. These articles must include novel and/or state-of-the-art methods, or significant improvements to existing methods. Novel and innovative applications of current methods that are validated and useful will also be published. JMM strives for scholarship, innovation and excellence. This demands scientific rigour, the best available methods and technologies, correctly replicated experiments/tests, the inclusion of proper controls, calibrations, and the correct statistical analysis. The presentation of the data must support the interpretation of the method/approach.
All aspects of microbiology are covered, except virology. These include agricultural microbiology, applied and environmental microbiology, bioassays, bioinformatics, biotechnology, biochemical microbiology, clinical microbiology, diagnostics, food monitoring and quality control microbiology, microbial genetics and genomics, geomicrobiology, microbiome methods regardless of habitat, high through-put sequencing methods and analysis, microbial pathogenesis and host responses, metabolomics, metagenomics, metaproteomics, microbial ecology and diversity, microbial physiology, microbial ultra-structure, microscopic and imaging methods, molecular microbiology, mycology, novel mathematical microbiology and modelling, parasitology, plant-microbe interactions, protein markers/profiles, proteomics, pyrosequencing, public health microbiology, radioisotopes applied to microbiology, robotics applied to microbiological methods,rumen microbiology, microbiological methods for space missions and extreme environments, sampling methods and samplers, soil and sediment microbiology, transcriptomics, veterinary microbiology, sero-diagnostics and typing/identification.