4.5 Article

Interaction of lytic phage T1245 with antibiotics for enhancement of antibacterial and anti-biofilm efficacy against multidrug-resistant Acinetobacter baumannii

期刊

BIOFOULING
卷 38, 期 10, 页码 994-1005

出版社

TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/08927014.2022.2163479

关键词

Acinetobacter baumannii; multidrug resistance; bacteriophage; synergistic effect; biofilm; antibiotic

资金

  1. Thailand Research Fund through the Royal Golden Jubilee PhD Programme
  2. National Research Council of Thailand
  3. [PHD/0106/2559]
  4. [N41A640071]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study found that the combination of specific phages and antibiotics can significantly reduce the biomass and bacterial viability of multidrug-resistant Acinetobacter baumannii biofilms. This is of great importance for the management of infections and elimination of bacterial biofilms.
Biofilms associated with multidrug-resistant (MDR) Acinetobacter baumannii on medical devices remain a big clinical problem. Antibiotic susceptibility tests were performed with eight commonly employed antibiotics against clinical isolates. The effects of antibiotics in combination with well-characterized lytic phage T1245 were studied to assess their antibacterial and anti-biofilm efficacy. Ceftazidime, colistin, imipenem, and meropenem significantly reduced bacterial density up to approximately 80% when combined with phage T1245, compared with control. Phage T1245 in combination with ceftazidime, colistin, and meropenem at subinhibitory concentrations demonstrated significant reduction in biomass and bacterial viability of 3-day established biofilms, compared with antibiotic alone. In addition, electron microscopy further confirmed the disruption of biofilm structure and cell morphology upon treatment with phage T1245 and antibiotics, including ceftazidime, colistin, and meropenem. Combined treatment of phage T1245 with these antibiotics could be employed for the management of A. baumannii infections and eradication of the bacterial biofilms.

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

4.5
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