4.7 Article Proceedings Paper

Lack of wall teichoic acids in Staphylococcus aureus leads to reduced interactions with endothelial cells and to attenuated virulence in a rabbit model of endocarditis

期刊

JOURNAL OF INFECTIOUS DISEASES
卷 191, 期 10, 页码 1771-1777

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS INC
DOI: 10.1086/429692

关键词

-

资金

  1. NCRR NIH HHS [RR-13304] Funding Source: Medline
  2. NIAID NIH HHS [AI-39108] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Wall teichoic acids (WTAs) are major surface components of gram-positive bacteria that have recently been shown to play a key role in nasal colonization by Staphylococcus aureus. In the present study, we assessed the impact that WTAs have on endovascular infections by using a WTA-deficient S. aureus mutant (Delta tagO). There were no significant differences detected between the isogenic parental strain (SA113) and the Delta tagO mutant in polymorphonuclear leukocyte - mediated opsonophagocytosis; killing by a prototypic platelet microbicidal protein; or binding to platelets, fibronectin, or fibrinogen. However, compared with the parental strain, the Delta tagO mutant adhered considerably less well to human endothelial cells, especially under flow conditions (70.3% reduction; P < .05). Beads coated with WTA bound to endothelium in a dose-dependent manner, suggesting that WTA contributes specifically to this interaction. These in vitro data closely paralleled those from a rabbit model of infective endocarditis in which the DtagO mutant was compared with the parental strain. Clearances of staphylococcus from the bloodstream were equivalent, but the DtagO mutant showed a significantly reduced capacity to both colonize sterile cardiac vegetations (P < .05) and proliferate within these vegetations, the kidneys, and the spleen (P < .0001). We conclude that WTA is an important factor in the induction and progression of endovascular S. aureus infection, likely through a specific interaction with endothelial cells.

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

4.7
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