Laboratory of Clinical Chemistry and Microbiology, IRCCS Galeazzi Institute, 20161, Milan, Italy.
Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2012 Oct;470(10):2915-25. doi: 10.1007/s11999-012-2415-3. Epub 2012 Jun 14.
Sonication and scraping of infected prostheses usually are used to improve diagnosis of prosthetic infections, reducing false negatives. Chemical methods that reduce biofilms also may allow higher levels of detection.
QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: We therefore asked: (1) Do dithiothreitol (DTT) and N-acetylcysteine (NAC) remove bacteria from biofilm formed on prosthetic materials? (2) Is bacterial recovery affected by differing DTT and NAC concentrations and incubation times? (3) Do treatments with DTT and NAC detach the same amounts of bacteria from biofilm on prosthetic materials as sonication and scraping? (4) Are these methods reproducible?
We treated polyethylene and titanium discs covered by biofilm formed by Pseudomonas aeruginosa and Staphylococcus aureus with DTT or NAC solutions at different concentrations for different times. We compared colony counts of S aureus, P aeruginosa, Staphylococcus epidermidis and Escherichia coli after treatment with NAC, DTT, sonication and scraping. We determined colony counts after treatment of biofilm formed by one strain of S aureus and one of P aeruginosa on five discs of each material analyzed on the same day and on five discs analyzed on five consecutive days.
Mean colony counts (LogCFU/mL) obtained after treatment with 1 g/L DTT for 15 minutes (5.3) were similar to those after sonication (4.9) and greater than those obtaining by scraping (3.4) and treatment with 2 g/L NAC for 30 minutes (1.9). DTT and sonication showed good reproducibility.
Our data suggest that treatment of prostheses with DTT may be a reasonable alternative to sonication to improve detection of biofilm-associated bacteria and supplement conventional laboratory culturing techniques for diagnosing periprosthetic infections.
对感染的假体进行超声处理和刮除通常用于提高假体感染的诊断水平,减少假阴性。减少生物膜的化学方法也可能允许更高水平的检测。
问题/目的:因此,我们提出了以下问题:(1)二硫苏糖醇(DTT)和 N-乙酰半胱氨酸(NAC)是否能从假体材料上形成的生物膜中去除细菌?(2)不同的 DTT 和 NAC 浓度和孵育时间是否会影响细菌的回收?(3)DTT 和 NAC 处理是否能从假体材料上的生物膜中去除与超声处理和刮除相同数量的细菌?(4)这些方法是否具有可重复性?
我们用 DTT 或 NAC 溶液处理覆盖有铜绿假单胞菌和金黄色葡萄球菌生物膜的聚乙烯和钛盘,浓度不同,时间不同。我们比较了用 NAC、DTT、超声处理和刮除处理后金黄色葡萄球菌、铜绿假单胞菌、表皮葡萄球菌和大肠杆菌的菌落计数。我们在同一天对每个材料的 5 个圆盘和连续 5 天对 5 个圆盘进行分析,以确定在一种金黄色葡萄球菌和一种铜绿假单胞菌形成的生物膜上处理后的菌落计数。
用 1g/L DTT 处理 15 分钟(5.3)获得的平均菌落计数(LogCFU/mL)与超声处理(4.9)相似,高于刮除(3.4)和用 2g/L NAC 处理 30 分钟(1.9)。DTT 和超声处理具有良好的可重复性。
我们的数据表明,用 DTT 处理假体可能是超声处理的合理替代方法,以提高对生物膜相关细菌的检测,并补充传统的实验室培养技术,用于诊断假体周围感染。