Tsikopoulos Alexios, Tsikopoulos Konstantinos, Sidiropoulos Konstantinos, Meroni Gabriele, Triaridis Stefanos, Drago Lorenzo, Papaioannidou Paraskevi
1st Department of Pharmacology, School of Medicine, Faculty of Health Sciences, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, 54124 Thessaloniki, Greece.
School of Medicine, University of Patras, 26504 Patras, Greece.
Medicina (Kaunas). 2024 Nov 28;60(12):1959. doi: 10.3390/medicina60121959.
Biofilm formation on cochlear implants (CIs) poses a major problem for surgeons, leading to a high incidence of explantation and revision surgery. Therefore, developing appropriate and cost-effective biofilm detection and prevention techniques is of the essence. In this systematic review, we sought to investigate the development of biofilm formation on CIs. We also elaborated on experimental preventative biofilm measures. We conducted a systematic search of both in vitro and in vivo literature published in PubMed, Scopus, and ScienceDirect, until 15 June 2024, for published studies evaluating the biofilm formation and strategies for inhibiting biofilm formation on CIs. Depending on the type of the included study, we assessed quality with the modified Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials tool, the Joanna Briggs Institute Case Reports Critical Appraisal Tool, a modified Delphi technique, and the ROBINS-I tool. We synthesized the available information on biofilm formation on CIs and the infection prevention capacity of the included antibiofilm agents. A total of 26 studies were included in this systematic review. Biofilms in CIs are usually localized in their recesses such as their removable magnet pocket as opposed to their smooth surfaces. and are the most commonly isolated microorganisms, and they tend to be strong biofilm producers. The optimal treatment strategy for a biofilm-infected CI is explantation. Most of the examined biofilm prevention methods in CIs present sufficient antibiofilm activity. Biofilm formation in CIs is considered one of the most dreadful complications. There have been no specific guidelines for the treatment of those cases, with removal and/or replacement of the CI being the treatment of choice. Various experimental prevention methods provide promising antibiofilm activity both in vivo and in vitro.
人工耳蜗（CI）上生物膜的形成给外科医生带来了一个重大问题，导致很高的取出和翻修手术发生率。因此，开发合适且具有成本效益的生物膜检测和预防技术至关重要。在本系统评价中，我们试图研究人工耳蜗上生物膜形成的发展情况。我们还阐述了实验性的生物膜预防措施。我们对截至2024年6月15日在PubMed、Scopus和ScienceDirect上发表的体外和体内文献进行了系统检索，以查找评估人工耳蜗上生物膜形成及抑制生物膜形成策略的已发表研究。根据纳入研究的类型，我们使用改良的《报告试验的统一标准》工具、乔安娜·布里格斯研究所病例报告批判性评价工具、改良的德尔菲技术和ROBINS - I工具评估质量。我们综合了关于人工耳蜗上生物膜形成以及所纳入抗生物膜剂的感染预防能力的现有信息。本系统评价共纳入26项研究。人工耳蜗中的生物膜通常位于其凹陷处，如可移除磁体袋，而非其光滑表面。 是最常分离出的微生物，并且它们往往是强大的生物膜生产者。生物膜感染的人工耳蜗的最佳治疗策略是取出。人工耳蜗中大多数检测的生物膜预防方法都具有足够的抗生物膜活性。人工耳蜗中的生物膜形成被认为是最可怕的并发症之一。对于这些病例的治疗尚无具体指南，人工耳蜗的取出和/或更换是首选治疗方法。各种实验性预防方法在体内和体外均具有有前景的抗生物膜活性。
