4.6 Review

Non-thermal Plasma Treatment of ESKAPE Pathogens: A Review

期刊

FRONTIERS IN MICROBIOLOGY
卷 12, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

FRONTIERS MEDIA SA
DOI: 10.3389/fmicb.2021.737635

关键词

plasma jet; dielectric barrier discharge; corona discharge; biofilm inactivation; bacterial inactivation; antibiotic resistance; antibiofilm activity

资金

  1. Charles University Research Program [Progress Q25]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

ESKAPE bacteria are a group of pathogens resistant to commonly used antibiotics, and non-thermal plasma shows promising potential as a bactericidal agent. Studies have shown that NTP can be widely applied for sterilization and disinfection in different fields, with significant application prospects.
The acronym ESKAPE refers to a group of bacteria consisting of Enterococcus faecium, Staphylococcus aureus, Klebsiella pneumoniae, Acinetobacter baumannii, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, and Enterobacter spp. They are important in human medicine as pathogens that show increasing resistance to commonly used antibiotics; thus, the search for new effective bactericidal agents is still topical. One of the possible alternatives is the use of non-thermal plasma (NTP), a partially ionized gas with the energy stored particularly in the free electrons, which has antimicrobial and anti-biofilm effects. Its mechanism of action includes the formation of pores in the bacterial membranes; therefore, resistance toward it is not developed. This paper focuses on the current overview of literature describing the use of NTP as a new promising tool against ESKAPE bacteria, both in planktonic and biofilm forms. Thus, it points to the fact that NTP treatment can be used for the decontamination of different types of liquids, medical materials, and devices or even surfaces used in various industries. In summary, the use of diverse experimental setups leads to very different efficiencies in inactivation. However, Gram-positive bacteria appear less susceptible compared to Gram-negative ones, in general.

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