4.7 Review

Impact of nanosystems in Staphylococcus aureus biofilms treatment

Journal

FEMS MICROBIOLOGY REVIEWS
Volume 43, Issue 6, Pages 622-641

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/femsre/fuz021

Keywords

nanotechnology; nanomedicine; drug delivery; antibacterial activity; biofilm eradication

Categories

Funding

  1. Fundacao para a Ciencia e Tecnologia (FCT) [SFRH/BD/130319/2017, PD/BD/105957/2014, IF/00293/2015, POCI-01-0145-FEDER31444]
  2. FCT through the FCT PhD Programmes
  3. Programa Operacional Capital Humano (POCH), by the BiotechHealth Programme (Doctoral Programme on Cellular and Molecular Biotechnology Applied to Health Sciences)
  4. FCT/MCTES [UID/QUI/50006/2019]
  5. Fund for Scientific Research Flanders (FWO grant) [WO.009.16N]
  6. Fundo Europeu de Desenvolvimento Regional (FEDER) - through the COMPETE 2020 - Operational Programme for Competitiveness and Internationalisation (POCI) [POCI-01-0145-FEDER31444]
  7. Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia [PD/BD/105957/2014, SFRH/BD/130319/2017] Funding Source: FCT

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Staphylococcus aureus (S. aureus) is considered by the World Health Organization as a high priority pathogen for which new therapies are needed. This is particularly important for biofilm implant-associated infections once the only available treatment option implies a surgical procedure combined with antibiotic therapy. Consequently, these infections represent an economic burden for Healthcare Systems. A new strategy has emerged to tackle this problem: for small bugs, small particles. Here, we describe how nanotechnology-based systems have been studied to treat S. aureus biofilms. Their features, drawbacks and potentialities to impact the treatment of these infections are highlighted. Furthermore, we also outline biofilm models and assays required for preclinical validation of those nanosystems to smooth the process of clinical translation.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available