Romanò Carlo Luca, Scarponi Sara, Gallazzi Enrico, Romanò Delia, Drago Lorenzo
Department of Reconstructive Surgery of Osteo-articular Infections C.R.I.O. Unit, IRCCS Galeazzi Orthopaedic Institute, Via R. Galeazzi 4, 20161, Milan, Italy.
Laboratory of Clinical Chemistry and Microbiology, I.R.C.C.S. Galeazzi Orthopaedic Institute, Milan, Italy.
J Orthop Surg Res. 2015 Oct 1;10:157. doi: 10.1186/s13018-015-0294-5.
Implanted biomaterials play a key role in current success of orthopedic and trauma surgery. However, implant-related infections remain among the leading reasons for failure with high economical and social associated costs. According to the current knowledge, probably the most critical pathogenic event in the development of implant-related infection is biofilm formation, which starts immediately after bacterial adhesion on an implant and effectively protects the microorganisms from the immune system and systemic antibiotics. A rationale, modern prevention of biomaterial-associated infections should then specifically focus on inhibition of both bacterial adhesion and biofilm formation. Nonetheless, currently available prophylactic measures, although partially effective in reducing surgical site infections, are not based on the pathogenesis of biofilm-related infections and unacceptable high rates of septic complications, especially in high-risk patients and procedures, are still reported.In the last decade, several studies have investigated the ability of implant surface modifications to minimize bacterial adhesion, inhibit biofilm formation, and provide effective bacterial killing to protect implanted biomaterials, even if there still is a great discrepancy between proposed and clinically implemented strategies and a lack of a common language to evaluate them.To move a step forward towards a more systematic approach in this promising but complicated field, here we provide a detailed overview and an original classification of the various technologies under study or already in the market. We may distinguish the following: 1. Passive surface finishing/modification (PSM): passive coatings that do not release bactericidal agents to the surrounding tissues, but are aimed at preventing or reducing bacterial adhesion through surface chemistry and/or structure modifications; 2. Active surface finishing/modification (ASM): active coatings that feature pharmacologically active pre-incorporated bactericidal agents; and 3. Local carriers or coatings (LCC): local antibacterial carriers or coatings, biodegradable or not, applied at the time of the surgical procedure, immediately prior or at the same time of the implant and around it. Classifying different technologies may be useful in order to better compare different solutions, to improve the design of validation tests and, hopefully, to improve and speed up the regulatory process in this rapidly evolving field.
植入生物材料在当前骨科和创伤外科手术的成功中起着关键作用。然而,与植入物相关的感染仍然是导致手术失败的主要原因之一,且伴随着高昂的经济和社会成本。根据目前的认知,在与植入物相关感染的发展过程中,可能最关键的致病事件是生物膜形成,这一过程在细菌粘附于植入物后立即开始,并有效地保护微生物免受免疫系统和全身抗生素的影响。因此,合理、现代的生物材料相关感染预防措施应特别注重抑制细菌粘附和生物膜形成。尽管如此,目前可用的预防措施虽然在一定程度上能有效减少手术部位感染,但并非基于生物膜相关感染的发病机制,并且仍有报道称,尤其是在高风险患者和手术中,败血症并发症的发生率高得令人无法接受。在过去十年中,多项研究探讨了植入物表面改性在最小化细菌粘附、抑制生物膜形成以及提供有效的细菌杀灭作用以保护植入生物材料方面的能力,尽管在提出的策略与临床实施策略之间仍存在很大差异,并且缺乏评估这些策略的通用标准。为了在这个充满前景但又复杂的领域朝着更系统的方法迈进一步,在此我们提供了对各种正在研究或已投入市场的技术的详细概述和原创分类。我们可以区分以下几种:1. 被动表面处理/改性(PSM):不向周围组织释放杀菌剂的被动涂层,旨在通过表面化学和/或结构改性来预防或减少细菌粘附;2. 主动表面处理/改性(ASM):具有预掺入药理活性杀菌剂的主动涂层;3. 局部载体或涂层(LCC):在手术过程中、紧接植入物之前或与植入物同时并围绕植入物应用的可生物降解或不可生物降解的局部抗菌载体或涂层。对不同技术进行分类可能有助于更好地比较不同的解决方案,改进验证测试的设计,并有望在这个快速发展的领域中改进和加速监管进程。