Adhesion ability and biofilm formation of Mycobacterium tuberculosis in the interface of polyethylene

doi:10.3969/j.issn.2095-4344.2014.52.011

Abstract

Abstract:

BACKGROUND: Studies have confirmed that there is no biofilm formation and lower adhesion ability of Mycobacterium tuberculosis in the interface of vitallium, but it has not been reported about biofilm formation and adhesion ability in the polyethylene.

OBJECTIVE: To observe the adhesion ability and biofilm formation of Mycobacterium tuberculosis on the polyethylene before and after rifampicin intervention.

METHODS: Under sterile conditions, polyethylene and vitallium samples were respectively placed in Middlebrook 7H9 culture medium to be co-cultured with Mycobacterium tuberculosis for 2 weeks. Then, two pieces of samples were taken randomly and cultured in 1 mg/L rifampicin (2 mL) for 2 weeks. The number of colonies and colony thickness in the unit area in the material interface were measured by confocal laser scanning microscope, and the structure of biofilms was observed by scanning electron microscope before and after rifampicin intervention.

RESULTS AND CONCLUSION: The colony thickness and the number of colonies in the unit area was significantly more in the polyethylene group than in the vitallium group before intervention (P < 0.05), but after intervention, these two indexes were reduced significantly in the polyethylene group (P < 0.05). Before rifampicin intervention, Mycobacterium tuberculosis was adherent to the polyethylene interface in a snowflake-like or nebulous shape, and biofilm structure was visible; in the vitallium interface, there were scattered colonies of Mycobacterium tuberculosis, but no biofilm formation. After rifampicin intervention, the number of colonies adhered in the polyethylene interface was reduced, Mycobacterium tuberculosis appeared to be shriveled and cleaved partially, and the biofilms exhibited varying degrees of damage; in the vitallium interface, there were no colonies, but single Mycobacterium tuberculosis was occasionally adherent to the polyethylene interface, and there was no biofilm formation. These findings indicate that Mycobacterium tuberculosis can form a biofilm in the polyethylene interface, but rifampin can inhibit and even destroy the biofilm of Mycobacterium tuberculosis.

中国组织工程研究杂志出版内容重点：生物材料；骨生物材料; 口腔生物材料; 纳米材料; 缓释材料; 材料相容性；组织工程

全文链接：

Key words: polyethylene, vitallium, Mycobacterium tuberculosis, rifampin

CLC Number:

R318

Xiong Qing-guang, Wang Yong-qing, Zhao Zhi-hui, Bi Hong-bin, Sun Jin-bao, Zhang Qing-jie, Hao Xiao-hui, Li Yi. Adhesion ability and biofilm formation of Mycobacterium tuberculosis in the interface of polyethylene[J]. Chinese Journal of Tissue Engineering Research, 2014, 18(52): 8420-8425.

Figures/Tables 2

References

[1] Chocholac D,Kala B,Gallo J,et al.Evaluation of treatment outcomes in tuberculosis of knee and hip joints in 2005-2012. Acta Chir Orthop Traumatol Cech.2013; 80(4): 256-262.
[2] De Haan J,Vreeling AW,Van Hellemondt G.Reactivation of ancient joint tuberculosis of the knee following total knee arthroplasty after 61 years: a case report. Knee.2008;15(4): 336-338.
[3] Furia JP,Box G,Lintner DM.Tuberculous arthritis of the knee presenting as a meniscal tear. Am J Orthop (Belle Mead NJ).1996;25(2):138-142.
[4] Neogi DS,Yadav CS,Ashok K,et al.Total hip arthroplasty in patients with active tuberculosis of the hip with advanced arthritis.Clin Orthop Relat Res.2010; 468(2):605-612.
[5] 王永清,毕红宾,赵志辉,等.晚期活动性全髋关节结核一期病灶清除全髋关节置换术的中远期疗效[J].中华骨科杂志,2013,33(9): 895-900.
[6] Wang Y,Wang J,Xu Z,et al.Total hip arthroplasty for active tuberculosis of the hip.Int Orthop.2010;34(8):1111-1114.
[7] 张晓岗,任姜栋,曹力,等.一期全髋关节置换术治疗晚期活动性髋关节结核[J].中华骨科杂志,2013,33(1):8-13.
[8] Finlay B,Falkow S.Common themes in microbial pathogenicity revisited. Microbiol Mol Biol Rev.1997;61(2):136-169.
[9] 毛彦杰,沈灏,蒋垚.生物膜与人工关节假体感染关系研究进展[J].中国修复重建外科杂志,2010,24(12):1463-1467.
[10] Costerton JW.Biofilm theory can guide the treatment of device-related orthopaedic infections.Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2005;(437):7-11.
[11] 马骏,李国庆,曹力.结核杆菌黏附不同人工关节假体材料的能力研究[J].中国组织工程研究,2012,16(47):8807-8812.
[12] 周劲松,陈建庭,金大地,等.结核分枝杆菌对材料粘附能力的体外实验研究[J].中国脊柱脊髓杂志,2003,13(11):26-29.
[13] 张宏其,郭超峰,唐明星,等.一期后路病灶清除、异形钛网椎间植骨融合治疗胸、腰椎结核[J].中华骨科杂志,2014,34(2): 102-108.
[14] 赵晨,蒲小兵,周强,等.后路病灶清除、椎间植骨融合内固定治疗复杂性胸、腰椎结核[J].中华骨科杂志,2014,34(2):109-115.
[15] 黄迅悟,冯会成,孙继桐,等.活动性髋关节结核一期病灶清除全髋关节置换28例报告[J].中华骨科杂志,2013,33(5):495-500.
[16] 魏召劝,孙俊英,查国春,等.采用高交联聚乙烯与传统聚乙烯髋臼内衬行人工全髋关节置换的比较研究[J].中国修复重建外科杂志, 2013,27(12):1414-1418.
[17] Judd KT,Noiseux N.Concomitant infection and local metal reaction in patients undergoing revision of metal on metal total hip arthroplasty . Iowa Orthop J. 2011; 31:59-63.
[18] Hosman AH,Van Der Mei HC,Bulstra SK,et al.Effects of metal-on-metal wear on the host immune system and infection in hip arthroplasty.Acta Orthop.2010; 81(5):526-534.
[19] Schildhauer TA,Robie B,Muhr G,et al.Bacterial adherence to tantalum versus commonly used orthopedic metallic implant materials.J Orthop Trauma.2006;20(7):476-484.
[20] Finlay B,Falkow S.Common themes in microbial pathogenicity revisited. Microbiol Mol Biol Rev.1997;61(2):136-169.
[21] Arnold WV,Shirtliff ME,Stoodley P.Bacterial biofilms and periprosthetic infections.J Bone Joint Surg Am.2013;95(24): 2223-2229.
[22] Chen WH,Jiang LS,Dai LY.Influence of bacteria on spinal implant centered infection: an in vitro and in vivo experimental comparison between Staphylococcus aureus and mycobacterium tuberculosis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976).2011; 36(2):103-108.
[23] 李传有,端木宏谨.结核分枝杆菌粘附素和结核病[C].中国防痨协会全国学术会议论文集,2005:214-215.
[24] Sanz J,Navarro J,Arbues A,et al.The transcriptional regulatory network of Mycobacterium tuberculosis. PLoS One.2011;6(7):e22178.
[25] 黄良库,徐涛,唐进,等.夫西地酸钠联合利福平对表皮葡萄球菌体外培养生物膜的作用[J].中国组织工程研究与临床康复, 2011, 15(21):3891-3894.
[26] Ojha AK,Baughn AD,Sambandan D,et al.Growth of Mycobacterium tuberculosis biofilms containing free mycolic acids and harbouring drug-tolerant bacteria. Mol Microbiol. 2008;69(1):164-174.
[27] Kulka K,Hatfull G,Ojha AK. Growth of Mycobacterium tuberculosis biofilms. J Vis Exp.2012;(60).pii: 3820.
[28] Grivet M, Morrier JJ, Benay G. Effect of hydrophobicity on in vitro streptococcal adhesion to dental alloys.J Mater Sci Mater Med.2000;11(10):637-642.
[29] Quitynen M,Bollen M.The influence of surface roughness and surface free energy on supra and subgingival plaque formation in man A review of the literature. J Clin Periodontol. 1995;22(1):1-14.
[30] Ramsugit S, Guma S,Pillay B,et al. Pili contributes to biofilm formation in vitro in Mycobacterium tuberculosis. Antonie Van Leeuwenhoek.2013;104(5):725-735.
[31] Alteri CJ,Xicohténcatl-Cortes J,Hess S,et al.Mycobacterium tuberculosis produces pili during human infection.Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2007;104(12):5145-5150.
[32] Gerstel U, Park C, Romling U.Complex regulation of csgD promoter activity by global regulatory proteins. Mol Microbiol. 2003;49:639-654.
[33] Latasa C,Roux A,Toledo-Arana A,et al.BapA, a large secreted protein required for biofilm formation and host colonization of Salmonella enterica serovar Enteritidis. Mol Microbiol. 2005; 58:1322-1339.
[34] 刘霞,郭庆龙,王若珺,等.结核分枝杆菌生物膜形成相关基因的筛选与鉴定[J].中国生物工程杂志,2013,33(4):15-21.
[35] Pang JM.Genetics of biofilm maturation in Mycobacterium tuberculosis. University of Washington,2011.
[36] 王星.表皮葡萄球菌和分枝杆菌生物膜相关基因的鉴定和功能研究[D].复旦大学, 2012.
[37] Pang JM,Layre E,Sweet L,et al.The polyketide Pks1 contributes to biofilm formation in Mycobacterium tuberculosis. J Bacteriol.2012;194(3):715-721.
[38] Fuqua WC,Winans SC,Greenberg EP.Quorum sensing in bacteria: The Lux R-Lux I family of density-responsive transcriptional regulators.J Bacteriol.1994; 176(2):269-275.
[39] Dickschat JS.Quorum sensing and bacterial biofilms. Nat Prod Rep.2010; 27(3):343-369.