4.6 Article

Active immunization using exotoxin A confers protection against Pseudomonas aeruginosa infection in a mouse burn model

Journal

BMC MICROBIOLOGY
Volume 9, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

BMC
DOI: 10.1186/1471-2180-9-23

Keywords

-

Categories

Funding

  1. Office of the Vice Chancellor for Researches of the Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Iran
  2. University of Medical Sciences
  3. Razi Vaccine and Serum Research Institute

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: Pseudomonas aeruginosa is an important cause of nosocomial infection and may lead to septicemia and death. We evaluated the immunogenicity of semi-purified exotoxin A from the bacterium in a mouse burn model. Methods: The toxoid was prepared from exotoxin A taken from toxigenic strains of P. aeruginosa (PA 103). 50 mice were immunized with the toxoid, burned with hot metal and infected with 1 x 10(8) CFU of toxigenic strains of P. aeruginosa (experimental group); 25 non-immunized mice were also burned and infected (control group). The mortality rate and presence of any exotoxin and P. aeruginosa in the sera, liver and spleen were determined. Results: In the experimental group, 2 mice died before the burns were administered and were excluded from the study. The remainder (48 mice) were challenged with a lethal dose of P. aeruginosa and followed for 70 days. 3 of these mice died. Neither P. aeruginosa nor exotoxin A was not detected in the liver, spleen or sera of the surviving mice. The protective efficacy of toxoid vaccination was therefore 93.8%. In the control group, all mice died from bacteremia and septicemia, most (80%) within 6 days, and P. aeruginosa and exotoxin A were isolated from sera, spleen and liver. Conclusion: Active immunization of mice using a semi-purified exotoxin A derived from P. aeruginosa was 93.8% effective at protecting mice from subsequent P. aeruginosa infections in a mouse burn model.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available