Suppr超能文献

六种超声刺激类型对铜绿假单胞菌体外生长影响的比较

A Comparison of Six Ultrasound Stimulation Types on Pseudomonas Aeruginosa Growth in Vitro.

作者信息

Alneami A Q, Khalil E Gh, Mohsien R A, Albeldawi A F

机构信息

Department of Biomedical Engineering, Al-Nahrain University, Baghdad, Iraq.

College of Biotechnology, Al Nahrain University, Baghdad, Iraq.

出版信息

J Biomed Phys Eng. 2018 Jun 1;8(2):203-208. eCollection 2018 Jun.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

This work evaluated the efficiency of common ultrasound stimulation (U.S.S) types on bacterial growth in vitro using clinically relevant conditions.

OBJECTIVE

To estimate different frequencies ultrasound bactericidal ability on bacteria in bacteria of Pseudomonas Aeruginosa.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Six types of U.S.S (continuous wave, 7w/cm, 20 KHz; continuous wave, 35w/0.8L, 40 KHz; continuous wave, 5w/cm, 1.1 MHz; pulsed wave, 5w/cm, 3.3 MHz; continuous wave, 5w/cm, 3.3 MHz and continuous wave, 0.5w/cm, 3.5 MHz) were applied to a separate set of culture plates containing for 10 minutes at room temperature on four sample sets to inhibit bacterial growth. After US.S treatment, the zone of inhibition at the US probe location was measured.

RESULTS

Zone of inhibition measurements demonstrated a significant inhibitory effect for continuous wave US.S of 5w/cm, 1.1 MHz; pulsed wave US.S of 5w/cm, 3.3 MHz; and continuous wave US.S of 5w/cm, 3.3 MHz ( < 0.05), but not for continuous wave US.S of 7w/cm, 20 KHz; continuous wave US.S of 35w/0.8L, 40 KHz; and continuous wave US.S of 0.5w/cm, 3.5 MHz.

CONCLUSION

The data suggest that for infected wounds, continuous wave US.S of 5w/cm and 1.1 MHz; pulsed wave US.S of 5w/cm and 3.3 MHz; and continuous wave US.S of 5w/cm and 3.3 MHz ultrasound treatments may have an initial bacterial inhibitory effect, which does not significantly change with subsequent treatments.

摘要

背景

本研究在临床相关条件下评估了常见超声刺激(USS)类型对体外细菌生长的影响。

目的

评估不同频率超声对铜绿假单胞菌的杀菌能力。

材料与方法

将六种类型的超声刺激(连续波,7w/cm,20KHz;连续波,35w/0.8L,40KHz;连续波,5w/cm,1.1MHz;脉冲波,5w/cm,3.3MHz;连续波,5w/cm,3.3MHz;连续波,0.5w/cm,3.5MHz)分别应用于四组含有细菌的培养板,在室温下处理10分钟以抑制细菌生长。超声刺激处理后,测量超声探头位置的抑菌圈。

结果

抑菌圈测量结果显示,5w/cm、1.1MHz的连续波超声刺激;5w/cm、3.3MHz的脉冲波超声刺激;以及5w/cm、3.3MHz的连续波超声刺激具有显著的抑菌作用(P<0.05),而7w/cm、20KHz的连续波超声刺激;35w/0.8L、40KHz的连续波超声刺激;以及0.5w/cm、3.5MHz的连续波超声刺激则没有显著抑菌作用。

结论

数据表明,对于感染伤口,5w/cm、1.1MHz的连续波超声刺激;5w/cm、3.3MHz的脉冲波超声刺激;以及5w/cm、3.3MHz的连续波超声刺激可能具有初步的细菌抑制作用,且后续处理不会使其发生显著变化。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/3bc1/6015641/6ed76507875a/JBPE-8-203-g001.jpg

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验