Max Planck Queensland Centre, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, QLD 4000, Australia; Faculty of Engineering, School of Mechanical, Medical and Process Engineering, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, QLD 4000, Australia; Australian Research Council (ARC) Training Centre for Multiscale 3D Imaging, Modelling, and Manufacturing (M3D Innovation), Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, QLD 4000, Australia.
Max Planck Queensland Centre, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, QLD 4000, Australia; Faculty of Engineering, School of Mechanical, Medical and Process Engineering, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, QLD 4000, Australia; Australian Research Council (ARC) Training Centre for Multiscale 3D Imaging, Modelling, and Manufacturing (M3D Innovation), Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, QLD 4000, Australia; Australian Research Council Training Centre for Cell and Tissue Engineering Technologies, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, QLD 4059, Australia.
Biomaterials. 2024 Sep;309:122578. doi: 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2024.122578. Epub 2024 Apr 20.
Biofilm research has grown exponentially over the last decades, arguably due to their contribution to hospital acquired infections when they form on foreign body surfaces such as catheters and implants. Yet, translation of the knowledge acquired in the laboratory to the clinic has been slow and/or often it is not attempted by research teams to walk the talk of what is defined as 'bench to bedside'. We therefore reviewed the biofilm literature to better understand this gap. Our search revealed substantial development with respect to adapting surfaces and media used in models to mimic the clinical settings, however many of the in vitro models were too simplistic, often discounting the composition and properties of the host microenvironment and overlooking the biofilm-implant-host interactions. Failure to capture the physiological growth conditions of biofilms in vivo results in major differences between lab-grown- and clinically-relevant biofilms, particularly with respect to phenotypic profiles, virulence, and antimicrobial resistance, and they essentially impede bench-to-bedside translatability. In this review, we describe the complexity of the biological processes at the biofilm-implant-host interfaces, discuss the prerequisite for the development and characterization of biofilm models that better mimic the clinical scenario, and propose an interdisciplinary outlook of how to bioengineer biofilms in vitro by converging tissue engineering concepts and tools.
在过去的几十年中，生物膜研究呈指数级增长，可以说这是由于它们在导管和植入物等异物表面形成时对医院获得性感染的贡献。然而，将实验室获得的知识转化为临床实践的速度一直很慢，或者研究团队往往不愿意将所谓的“从基础到临床”付诸实践。因此，我们回顾了生物膜文献，以更好地了解这一差距。我们的搜索结果表明，在适应表面和用于模拟临床环境的培养基方面取得了实质性的进展，然而，许多体外模型过于简单，往往忽略了宿主微环境的组成和特性，也忽略了生物膜-植入物-宿主的相互作用。未能在体内捕获生物膜的生理生长条件，导致实验室培养的生物膜和临床相关的生物膜之间存在重大差异，特别是在表型特征、毒力和抗微生物耐药性方面，这实质上阻碍了从实验室到临床的转化。在这篇综述中，我们描述了生物膜-植入物-宿主界面处的生物学过程的复杂性，讨论了开发和表征更能模拟临床情况的生物膜模型的前提条件，并提出了一种通过汇聚组织工程概念和工具来体外生物工程生物膜的跨学科展望。
