HOCl-producing electrochemical bandage for treating Pseudomonas aeruginosa-infected murine wounds.
HOCl-producing electrochemical bandage for treating Pseudomonas aeruginosa-infected murine wounds.
复制标题
产生次氯酸的电化学绷带，用于治疗铜绿假单胞菌感染的小鼠伤口。
DOI：
10.1128/aac.01216-23
复制
发表时间：
2024
影响因子：
4.9
通讯作者：
Patel,Robin
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Fleming,Derek;Bozyel,Ibrahim;Ozdemir,Dilara;Otero,JudithAlvarez;Karau,MelissaJ;Anoy,MdMonzurulIslam;Koscianski,Christina;Schuetz,AudreyN;Greenwood-Quaintance,KerrylE;Mandrekar,JayawantN;Beyenal,Haluk;Patel,Robin
日益增长的耐药细菌病原体的威胁需要开发替代的抗菌方法。这对于慢性伤口感染尤其如此，慢性伤口感染通常含有生物膜驻留细菌。评价了一种新型电化学绷带（e-绷带）对铜绿假单胞菌伤口生物膜的抑制作用。在小鼠背部造成5 mm的皮肤伤口，用106个菌落形成单位（CFU）的P.铜绿。在2天内形成生物膜，之后将e-绷带放置在伤口床上并用Tegadaline覆盖。向小鼠施用仅Tegaderm（对照）、非极化e-绷带（无HOCl产生）或极化e-绷带（使用产生HOCl的恒电位仪），有或没有全身性阿米卡星。治疗前后测量脓液和伤口面积。48小时后，收获伤口用于细菌定量。极化e-绷带治疗48小时后，与非极化对照组相比，生物膜平均减少1.4 log 10 CFU/g（P= 0.0107），与仅Tegaderm对照组相比，生物膜平均减少2.2 log 10 CFU/g（P= 0.004）。阿米卡星改善了仅Tegaderm组（P= 0.0045）和非极化对照组（P= 0.0312）的CFU减少，但极化组（P= 0.3876）没有改善。与仅Tegaderm组相比，极化组的化脓较少（P= 0.009）。无论是极化或非极化e-绷带治疗，伤口闭合既不受阻碍，也没有改善。同时使用阿米卡星不会影响伤口闭合或化脓。总之，产生HOCl的e-绷带降低P。aerodecosain伤口生物膜，在伤口愈合中没有损害，代表了一种有前途的解决伤口感染的无抗生素方法。
The growing threat of antibiotic-resistant bacterial pathogens necessitates the development of alternative antimicrobial approaches. This is particularly true for chronic wound infections, which commonly harbor biofilm-dwelling bacteria. A novel electrochemical bandage (e-bandage) delivering low-levels of hypochlorous acid (HOCl) was evaluated againstPseudomonas aeruginosamurine wound biofilms. 5 mm skin wounds were created on the dorsum of mice and infected with 106colony-forming units (CFU) ofP. aeruginosa. Biofilms were formed over 2 days, after which e-bandages were placed on the wound beds and covered with Tegaderm. Mice were administered Tegaderm-only (control), non-polarized e-bandage (no HOCl production), or polarized e-bandage (using an HOCl-producing potentiostat), with or without systemic amikacin. Purulence and wound areas were measured before and after treatment. After 48 hours, wounds were harvested for bacterial quantification. Forty-eight hours of polarized e-bandage treatment resulted in mean biofilm reductions of 1.4 log10CFUs/g (P= 0.0107) vs non-polarized controls and 2.2 log10CFU/g (P= 0.004) vs Tegaderm-only controls. Amikacin improved CFU reduction in Tegaderm-only (P= 0.0045) and non-polarized control groups (P= 0.0312) but not in the polarized group (P= 0.3876). Compared to the Tegaderm-only group, there was less purulence in the polarized group (P= 0.009). Wound closure was neither impeded nor improved by either polarized or non-polarized e-bandage treatment. Concurrent amikacin did not impact wound closure or purulence. In conclusion, an HOCl-producing e-bandage reducedP. aeruginosain wound biofilms with no impairment in wound healing, representing a promising antibiotic-free approach for addressing wound infection.