4.6 Article

In vitro activity of N-acetylcysteine against Stenotrophomonas maltophilia and Burkholderia cepacia complex grown in planktonic phase and biofilm

期刊

PLOS ONE
卷 13, 期 10, 页码 -

出版社

PUBLIC LIBRARY SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0203941

关键词

-

资金

  1. Zambon S.p.A.

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Stenotrophomonas maltophilia and Burkholderia cepacia complex (Bcc) have been increasingly recognized as relevant pathogens in hospitalized, immunocompromised and cystic fibrosis (CF) patients. As a result of complex mechanisms, including biofilm formation and multidrug resistance phenotype, S. maltophilia and Bcc respiratory infections are often refractory to therapy, and have been associated with a worse outcome in CF patients. Here we demonstrate for the first time that N-acetylcysteine (NAC), a mucolytic agent with antioxidant and anti-inflammatory properties, may exhibit antimicrobial and antibiofilm activity against these pathogens. The antimicrobial and antibiofilm activity of high NAC concentrations, potentially achievable by topical administration, was tested against a collection of S. maltophilia (n = 19) and Bcc (n = 19) strains, including strains from CF patients with acquired resistance traits. Minimum Inhibitory Concentrations (MICs) and Minimum Bactericidal Concentrations (MBCs) ranged from 16 to 32 mg/ml and from 32 to >32 mg/ml, respectively. Sub-MIC concentrations (i.e., 0.25 x MIC) slowed down the growth kinetics of most strains. In time-kill assays, 2-day-old biofilms were more affected than planktonic cultures, suggesting a specific antibiofilm activity of NAC against these pathogens. Indeed, a dose- and time-dependent antibiofilm activity of NAC against most of the S. maltophilia and Bcc strains tested was observed, with a sizable antibiofilm activity observed also at 0.5 and 1 x MIC NAC concentrations. Furthermore, at those concentrations, NAC was also shown to significantly inhibit biofilm formation with the great majority of tested strains.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据