Archivos

Effect of biomaterials hydrophobicity and roughness on biofilm development

Este es el resumen de nuestro trabajo científico «Effect of biomaterials hydrophobicity and roughness on biofilm development» que ha sido publicado en la revista Journal of Materials Science: Materials in Medicine. Este trabajo forma parte de la Tesis de Doctorado de Iker De la Pinta, que dirigimos Teresa Guraya y yo. Esta Tesis se defenderá el próximo jueves 14 de noviembre en la Facultad de Medicina y Enfermería.

Felicito a mis colegas Iker De-la-Pinta, Mónica Cobos, Julen Ibarretxe, Elisabeth Montoya, Elena Eraso y Teresa Guraya, por su excelente trabajo. Agradezco a Francisco José Álvarez y Hector Lafuente (BioCruces Health Research Institute) y a Ane Miren Zaldua (Leartiker Polymer R&D) por su inestimable ayuda.

El trabajo completo está en Journal of Materials Science: Materials in Medicine  (no es de acceso libre)

Este es su Resumen:

Most hospitalized patients are carriers of biomedical devices. Infections associated with these devices cause great morbidity and mortality, especially in patients in intensive care units. Numerous strategies have been designed to prevent biofilm development on biodevices. However, biofilm formation is a complex process not fully clarified. In the current study, roughness and hydrophobicity of different biomaterials was analyzed to assess their influences on the biofilm formation of four leading etiological causes of healthcare-associated infections, Escherichia coliPseudomonas aeruginosaStaphylococcus epidermidis and Candida albicans, using a CDC biofilm reactor. Hydrophobic materials allowed the formation of more abundant and profuse biofilms. Roughness had effect on biofilm formation, but its influence was not significant when material hydrophobicity was considered.

Method-Dependent Epidemiological Cutoff Values for Detection of Triazole Resistance in Candida and Aspergillus Species for the Sensititre YeastOne Colorimetric Broth and Etest Agar Diffusion Methods

Os dejo el resumen de nuestro trabajo científico colaborativo «Method-Dependent Epidemiological Cutoff Values for Detection of Triazole Resistance in Candida and Aspergillus Species for the Sensititre YeastOne Colorimetric Broth and Etest Agar Diffusion Methods» que ha sido publicado en la revista Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy. En este trabajo, proponemos puntos de corte epidemiológicos in vitro, con los métodos Sensititre y Etest para detectar la resistencia en Candida y Aspergillus a los fármacos antifúngicos, denominados triazoles, como fluconazol, itraconazol, posaconazol y voriconazol.

Felicito a mis colegas Espinel-Ingroff A, Turnidge J, Alastruey-Izquierdo A, Botterel F, Canton E, Castro C, Chen YC, Chen Y, Chryssanthou E, Dannaoui E, Garcia-Effron G, Gonzalez GM, Govender NP, Guinea J, Kidd S, Lackner M, Lass-Flörl C, Linares-Sicilia MJ, López-Soria L, Magobo R, Pelaez T, Rodriguez-Iglesia MA, Ruiz MA, Sánchez-Reus F, Sanguinetti M, Shields R, Szweda P, Tortorano A, Wengenack NL, Bramati S, Cavanna C, DeLuca C, Gelmi M, Grancini A, Lombardi G, Meletiadis J, Negri CE, Passera M, Peman J, Prigitano A, Sala E, Tejada M, por su excelente trabajo.

El trabajo completo está en AAC 

Este es su Resumen:

Although the Sensititre Yeast-One (SYO) and Etest methods are widely utilized, interpretive criteria are not available for triazole susceptibility testing of Candida or Aspergillus species. We collected fluconazole, itraconazole, posaconazole, and voriconazole SYO and Etest MICs from 39 laboratories representing all continents for (method/agent-dependent) 11,171 Candida albicans, 215 C. dubliniensis, 4,418 C. glabrata species complex, 157 C. guilliermondii (Meyerozyma guilliermondii), 676 C. krusei (Pichia kudriavzevii), 298 C. lusitaniae (Clavispora lusitaniae), 911 C. parapsilosis sensu stricto, 3,691 C. parapsilosis species complex, 36 C. metapsilosis, 110 C. orthopsilosis, 1,854 C. tropicalis, 244 Saccharomyces cerevisiae, 1,409 Aspergillus fumigatus, 389 A. flavus, 130 A. nidulans, 233 A. niger, and 302 A. terreus complex isolates. SYO/Etest MICs for 282 confirmed non-wild-type (non-WT) isolates were included: ERG11 (C. albicans), ERG11 and MRR1 (C. parapsilosis), cyp51A (A. fumigatus), and CDR2 and CDR1 overexpression (C. albicans and C. glabrata, respectively). Interlaboratory modal agreement was superior by SYO for yeast species and by the Etest for Aspergillus spp. Distributions fulfilling CLSI criteria for epidemiological cutoff value (ECV) definition were pooled, and we proposed SYO ECVs for S. cerevisiae and 9 yeast and 3 Aspergillus species and Etest ECVs for 5 yeast and 4 Aspergillus species. The posaconazole SYO ECV of 0.06 µg/ml for C. albicans and the Etest itraconazole ECV of 2 µg/ml for A. fumigatus were the best predictors of non-WT isolates. These findings support the need for method-dependent ECVs, as, overall, the SYO appears to perform better for susceptibility testing of yeast species and the Etest appears to perform better for susceptibility testing of Aspergillus spp. Further evaluations should be conducted with more Candida mutants.