journal article·2024-02-07

In Vitro Assessment of Bacterial Adhesion and Biofilm Formation on Novel Bioactive, Biodegradable Electrospun Fiber Meshes Intended to Support Tendon Rupture Repair

Iris Miescher, Julia Rieber, Tiziano A. Schweizer, Mariano Orlietti, Andrea Tarnutzer, Federica Andreoni, Gabriella Meier Buergisser, Pietro Giovanoli, Maurizio Calcagni, Jess G. Snedeker, Annelies S. Zinkernagel, Johanna Buschmann

Publisher page

Abstract

The surgical repair of a ruptured tendon faces two major problems: specifically increased fibrous adhesion to the surrounding tissue and inferior mechanical properties of the scar tissue compared to the native tissue. Bacterial attachment to implant materials is an additional problem as it might lead to severe infections and impaired recovery. To counteract adhesion formation, two novel implant materials were fabricated by electrospinning, namely, a random fiber mesh containing hyaluronic acid (HA) and poly(ethylene oxide) (PEO) in a ratio of 1:1 (HA/PEO 1:1) and 1:4 (HA/PEO 1:4), respectively. Electrospun DegraPol (DP) treated with silver nanoparticles (DP-Ag) was developed to counteract the bacterial attachment. The three novel materials were compared to the previously described DP and DP with incorporated insulin-like growth factor-1 (DP-IGF-1), two implant materials that were also designed to improve tendon repair. To test whether the materials are prone to bacterial adhesion and biofilm formation, we assessed 10 strains of Staphylococcus aureus, Staphylococcus epidermidis, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, and Enterococcus faecalis, known for causing nosocomial infections. Fiber diameter, pore size, and water contact angle, reflecting different degrees of hydrophobicity, were used to characterize all materials. Generally, we observed higher biofilm formation on the more hydrophobic DP as compared to the more hydrophilic DP-IGF-1 and a trend toward reduced biofilm formation for DP treated with silver nanoparticles. For the two HA/PEO implants, a similar biofilm formation was observed. All tested materials were highly prone to bacterial adherence and biofilm formation, pointing toward the need of further material development, including the optimized incorporation of antibacterial agents such as silver nanoparticles or antibiotics.
Source: openalex_inverted_index · Quality: baseline

Research context

OpenAlex topics: Tendon Structure and Treatment · Wound Healing and Treatments · Surgical Sutures and Adhesives

SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.

Affiliations

Division of Plastic Surgery and Hand Surgery, University Hospital Zurich, Sternwartstrasse 14, 8091 Zurich, Switzerland

Department of Infectious Diseases and Hospital Epidemiology, University Hospital Zurich, University of Zurich, Rämistrasse 100, 8091 Zurich, Switzerland

Department of Dermatology, University Hospital Zurich, University of Zurich, Rämistrasse 100, 8091 Zurich, Switzerland

Laboratory for Orthopedic Biomechanics, Department of Orthopedics, University of Zurich, Lengghalde 5, 8008 Zurich, Switzerland

Funding

Schweizerischer Nationalfonds zur F?rderung der Wissenschaftlichen Forschung · Universit?t Z?rich

References (48)

Show source-provided references
1. 10.3928/01477447-20100924-0610.3928/01477447-20100924-06 ↗
2. 10.1177/0363546502030004170110.1177/03635465020300041701 ↗
3. 10.1155/2014/78363210.1155/2014/783632 ↗
4. 10.1186/s40814-019-0443-410.1186/s40814-019-0443-4 ↗
5. 10.1177/175319341245864610.1177/1753193412458646 ↗
6. 10.1089/ten.tea.2012.020810.1089/ten.tea.2012.0208 ↗
7. 10.1155/2014/65624010.1155/2014/656240 ↗
8. 10.1002/mabi.20150045510.1002/mabi.201500455 ↗
9. 10.22203/eCM.v034a0210.22203/eCM.v034a02 ↗
10. 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2019.11972210.1016/j.biomaterials.2019.119722 ↗
11. 10.3390/ijms24121027210.3390/ijms241210272 ↗
12. 10.1136/mp.54.5.31110.1136/mp.54.5.311 ↗
13. 10.1615/JLongTermEffMedImplants.202204197810.1615/JLongTermEffMedImplants.2022041978 ↗
14. 10.3415/VCOT-14-08-013310.3415/VCOT-14-08-0133 ↗
15. 10.1128/CMR.15.2.167-193.200210.1128/CMR.15.2.167-193.2002 ↗
16. 10.1038/s41579-022-00686-010.1038/s41579-022-00686-0 ↗
17. 10.3390/ijms2311595810.3390/ijms23115958 ↗
18. 10.1177/2280800021104030410.1177/22808000211040304 ↗
19. 10.1089/sur.2007.04410.1089/sur.2007.044 ↗
20. 10.1177/0363546521106811410.1177/03635465211068114 ↗
21. 10.1097/SHK.000000000000069210.1097/SHK.0000000000000692 ↗
22. 10.3390/polym1007070110.3390/polym10070701 ↗
23. 10.2174/092986732166614030410432810.2174/0929867321666140304104328 ↗
24. 10.3390/polym1109151710.3390/polym11091517 ↗
25. 10.1177/2050313x2092132610.1177/2050313x20921326 ↗
26. 10.3944/AOTT.2014.13.001510.3944/AOTT.2014.13.0015 ↗
27. 10.2106/JBJS.15.0111710.2106/JBJS.15.01117 ↗
28. 10.1177/2325967122111213810.1177/23259671221112138 ↗
29. 10.3201/eid2610.19171110.3201/eid2610.191711 ↗
30. 10.22203/eCM.v033a1110.22203/eCM.v033a11 ↗
31. 10.1016/j.nano.2015.11.01610.1016/j.nano.2015.11.016 ↗
32. 10.1016/j.jdsr.2021.05.00310.1016/j.jdsr.2021.05.003 ↗
33. 10.1016/S0927-7765(99)00029-610.1016/S0927-7765(99)00029-6 ↗
34. 10.1163/156856297X0026310.1163/156856297X00263 ↗
35. 10.1111/j.1574-6968.1984.tb00743.x10.1111/j.1574-6968.1984.tb00743.x ↗
36. 10.1016/S0927-7765(98)00037-X10.1016/S0927-7765(98)00037-X ↗
37. 10.1128/aem.53.8.1893-1897.198710.1128/aem.53.8.1893-1897.1987 ↗
38. 10.22203/eCM.v008a0510.22203/eCM.v008a05 ↗
39. 10.1002/bjs.615410.1002/bjs.6154 ↗
40. 10.1088/1748-6041/3/3/03400310.1088/1748-6041/3/3/034003 ↗
41. 10.1021/acsami.0c1466810.1021/acsami.0c14668 ↗
42. 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2013.07.04410.1016/j.biomaterials.2013.07.044 ↗
43. 10.1097/00006534-199604000-0001710.1097/00006534-199604000-00017 ↗
44. 10.1038/s41598-021-02780-410.1038/s41598-021-02780-4 ↗
45. Ząbkowski T. · Urol J. · 2015 · 12 · 2192
46. 10.1021/acsami.0c0078210.1021/acsami.0c00782 ↗
47. 10.1039/C8TB02425A10.1039/C8TB02425A ↗
48. 10.1016/j.jhazmat.2019.12197410.1016/j.jhazmat.2019.121974 ↗