Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-q99xh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-31T15:22:20.713Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Incidence and nature of peritoneal catheter biofilm determined by electron and confocal laser scanning microscopy

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 May 2009

S. P. Gorman ,
C. G. Adair  and
W. M. Mawhinney
S. P. Gorman
Affiliation:
School of Pharmacy, Medical Biology Centre, The Queen's University of Belfast, Belfast BT9 7BL, UK
C. G. Adair
Affiliation:
School of Pharmacy, Medical Biology Centre, The Queen's University of Belfast, Belfast BT9 7BL, UK
W. M. Mawhinney
Affiliation:
School of Pharmacy, Medical Biology Centre, The Queen's University of Belfast, Belfast BT9 7BL, UK
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

Thirty-two Tenckhoff catheters retrieved from continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis patients with a history of peritonitis were examined for microbial biofilm. Confocal laser scanning microscopy was successfully employed to visualize bacteria in biofilm occluded from view by scanning electron microscopy. Occluded but viable microbial biofilm was associated with 17 (81%) catheters from patients free from infection following renal transplant. Mixed isolate biofilm with two or more isolates of coagulase-negative staphylococci or Staphylococcus aureus was found on 41% of these catheters. Clearly visible viable biofilm consisting exclusively of Pseudomonas aeruginosa occurred on all four catheters removed due to recurrent peritonitis. Five (71%) catheters retrieved from patients transferred to haemodialysis had viable biofilm. Antibiotic sensitivities of the biofilm isolates were similar in profile to those reported for non-biofilm isolates from infected dialysate. Persistence of catheter biofilm despite direct contact with therapeutic levels of antibiotics in peritoneal dialysate requires that attention be directed towards improving antibiotic efficacy against peritonitis-causing bacteria in biofilm form.

Type
Research Article
Information
Epidemiology & Infection , Volume 112 , Issue 3 , June 1994 , pp. 551 - 559
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1994

References

REFERENCES

1.Mawhinney, WM, Adair, CG, Gorman, SP. The development and treatment of peritonitis in patients undergoing eontinuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis. Int J Pharm Pract 1991; 1: 10–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2.Spencer, RC. Infections in continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis. J Med Microbiol 1988; 27: 1–9.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
3.Mawhinney, WM, Adair, CG, Gorman, SP. The nature and role of microbial biofilm in infections associated with prosthetic devices. Int J Pharm Pract 1992; 1: 136–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
4.Kluge, RM. Infections of prosthetic heart valves and arterial grafts. Heart Lung 1983; 11: 146–51.Google Scholar
5.Tenney, JH, Moody, MR, Newman, KA, Schimpff, SC. Adherent microorganisms on lumenal surfaces of long-term intravenous catheters. Arch Int Med 1986; 146: 1949–54.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
6.Nickle, JC. Wright, JB, Ruseska, I, Marrie, TJ. Whitfleld, C. Costerton, JW. Antibiotic resistance of Pseudomonas aeruginosa colonising a urinary catheter in vitro. Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis 1985; 4: 213–8.Google Scholar
7.Gorman, SP, Adair, CG, O'Neill, F, Goldsmith, EC, Webb, CH. Influence of selective decontamination of the digestive tract on microbial biofilm formation on endotracheal tubes from artificially ventilated patients. Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis 1993; 12: 9–17.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
8.Evans, RC, Holmes, CJ. Effect of vancomycin hydroehloride on Staphylococcus epidermidis biofilm associated with silicone elastomer. Antimicrob Ag Chemother 1987; 31: 889–94.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
9.Gorman, SP, Mawhinney, WM, Adair, CG. Confocal laser scanning microscopy of adherent microorganisms, biofilms and surfaces. In: Microbial biofilms: formation and control. Denyer, SP. Gorman, SP, Sussman, M, eds. The Society for Applied Bacteriology Technical Series No. 30. Oxford: Blackwell Scientific Publications. 1993: 95–107.Google Scholar
10.Marrie, TJ. Noble, MA. Costerton, JW. Examination of the morphology of bacteria adhering to peritoneal dialysis catheters by scanning and transmission electron microscopy. J Clin Microbiol 1983; 18: 1388–98.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
11.Dasgupta, MK, Ulan, RA, Bettcher, KB, Burns, V, Lam, K. Dosseter, JB, Costerton, JW. Relationship of adherent bacterial biofilms to peritonitis in chronic ambulatory peritoneal dialysis. Perit Dial Bull 1987; 7: 168–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
12.Holmes, CJ, Evans, RE, Vonesh, E. Application of an empirically derived growth curve model to characterise Staphylococcus epidermidis biofilm development on silicone elastomer. Biomaterials 1989; 10: 625–9.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
13.Gorman, SP. Microbial adherence and biofilm production. In: Mechanisms of action of chemical biocides: their study and exploitation. Denyer, SP, Hugo, WB. eds. The Society for Applied Bacteriology Technical Series No. 27. Oxford: Blackwell Scientific Publications, 1991: 271–95.Google Scholar
14.Reed, WP, Light, PD. Newman, KA. Biofilm on Tenckhoff catheters: a possible source for peritonitis. In: Frontiers in peritoneal dialysis. Maher, JF et al. eds. New York: Field, Rich and Associates. 1986: 176–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
15.Gorman, SP, Mawhinney, WM, Adair, CG, Issoukis, M. Confocal laser scanning microscopy of peritoneal catheter surfaces. J Med Microbiol 1993; 38: 411–7.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
16.Howgrave-Graham, AR, Wallis, FM. Preparation techniques for the electron microscopy of granular sludge from an anaerobic digester. Lett Appl Microbiol 1991; 13: 87–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
17.Woldringh, CL, De Jong, MA, Van Den Berg, W, Koppes, L. Morphological analysis of the division cycle of two Escherichia coli substrains during slow growth. J Bacteriol 1977; 131: 270–9.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
18.Sutherland, IW. Surface carbohydrates of the procaryotic cell. London: Academic Press, 1977.Google Scholar
19.Lawrence, JR. Korber, DR. Hoyle, BD, Costerton, JW, Caldwell, DE. Optical sectioning of microbial biofilms. J Bacterio 1991; 173: 6558–67.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
20.Verger, C, Chesneau, AM, Thibault, M. Biofilm on Tenckhoff catheters: a negligible source of contamination. Perit Dial Bull 1987; 7: 168–73.Google Scholar
21.Verbrugh, HA. Organisms causing peritonitis. In: CAPD: Host defence, nutrition and ultrafiltration. Coles, GA. Davies, M. Williams, JD, eds. Contrib Nephrol. Basel, Karger, 1990; 85: 39–48.Google Scholar