Antimicrobial photodynamic activity of hypericin against methicillin-susceptible and resistant Staphylococcus aureus biofilms

Papers of special note have been highlighted as: • of interest; •• of considerable interest

References

• 1 Archer NK, Mazaitis MJ, Costerton JW, Leid JG, Powers ME, Shirtliff ME. Staphylococcus aureus biofilms: properties, regulation, and roles in human. Virulence 2(5), 445–459 (2011).
  MedlineGoogle Scholar
• 2 Stewart PS, Costerton JW. Antibiotic resistance of bacteria in biofilms. Lancet 358(9276), 135–138 (2001).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 3 Donlan RM, Costerton JW. Biofilms: survival mechanisms of clinically relevant microorganisms. Clin. Microbiol. Rev. 15(2), 167–193 (2002).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 4 Arciola CR, Montanaro L, Costerton JW. New trends in diagnosis and control strategies for implant infections. Int. J. Artif. Organs 34(9), 727–736 (2011).• This review discusses the use of new methods for the diagnosis of biofilm infections and new strategies to prevent or control infections related to biofilms.
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 5 Tegos GP, Anbe M, Yang C et al. Protease-stable polycationic photosensitizer conjugates between polyethyleneimine and chlorin (e6) for broad-spectrum antimicrobial photoinactivation. Antimicrob. Agents. Chemother. 50(4), 1402–1410 (2006).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 6 Street CN, Gibbs A, Pedigo L, Andersen D, Loebel NG. In vitro photodynamic eradication of Pseudomonas aeruginosa in planktonic and biofilm culture. Photochem. Photobiol. 85(1), 137–143 (2009).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 7 Li X, Guo H, Tian Q et al. Effects of 5-aminolevulinic acid-mediated photodynamic therapy on antibiotic-resistant staphylococcal biofilm: an in vitro study. J. Surg. Res. 184(2), 1013–1021 (2013).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 8 Grinholc M, Rapacka-Zdonczyk A, Rybak B, Szabados F, Bielawski KP. Multiresistant strains are as susceptible to photodynamic inactivation as their naïve counterparts: protoporphyrin IX-mediated photoinactivation reveals differences between methicillin-resistant and methicillin-sensitive Staphylococcus aureus strains. Photomed. Laser Surg. 32(3), 121–129 (2014).•• Article that evaluates the antimicrobial photodynamic therapy against a significant number of methicillin-susceptible and resistant S. aureus clinical isolates.
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 9 De Melo WC, Avci P, de Oliveira MN et al. Photodynamic inactivation of biofilm: taking a lightly colored approach to stubborn infection. Expert Rev. Anti Infect. Ther. 11(7), 669–693 (2013).•• This review focuses on the aspects of antimicrobial photodynamic therapy that are designed to increase its efficiency against biofilms.
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 10 Wood S, Metcalf D, Devine D, Robinson C. Erythrosine is a potential photosensitizer for the photodynamic therapy of oral plaque biofilms. J. Antimicrob. Chemother. 57(4), 680–684 (2006).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 11 Garcez AS, Ribeiro MS, Tegos GP, Núñez SC, Jorge AO, Hamblin MR. Antimicrobial photodynamic therapy combined with conventional endodontic treatment to eliminate root canal biofilm infection. Lasers Surg. Med. 39, 59–66 (2007).
  MedlineGoogle Scholar
• 12 Sharma M, Visai L, Bragheri F, Cristiani I, Gupta PK, Speziale P. Toluidine blue-mediated photodynamic effects on staphylococcal biofilms. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 52(1), 299–305 (2008).• This study examines the photodynamic therapy effects on the viability and architecture of staphylococcal biofilms.
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 13 Di Poto A, Sbarra MS, Provenza G, Visai L, Speziale P. The effect of photodynamic treatment combined with antibiotic action or host defence mechanisms on Staphylococcus aureus biofilms. Biomaterials 30(18), 3158–3166 (2009).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 14 Saino E, Sbarra MS, Arciola et al. Photodynamic action of Tri-meso (N-methyl-pyridyl), meso (N-tetradecyl-pyridyl) porphine on Staphylococcus epidermidis biofilms grown on Ti6Al4V alloy. Int. J. Artif. Organs. 33(9), 636–645 (2010).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 15 Mantareva V, Kussovski V, Angelov I et al. Non-aggregated Ga (III)-phthalocyanines in the photodynamic inactivation of planktonic and biofilm cultures of pathogenic microorganisms. Photochem. Photobiol. Sci. 10(1), 91–102 (2011).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 16 Pereira CA, Romeiro RL, Costa AC, Machado AK, Junqueira JC, Jorge AO. Susceptibility of Candida albicans, Staphylococcus aureus and Streptococcus mutans biofilms to photodynamic inactivation: an in vitro study. Lasers Med Sci. 26(3), 341–348 (2011).
  MedlineGoogle Scholar
• 17 Bugaj AM. Targeted photodynamic therapy – a promising strategy of tumor treatment. Photochem. Photobiol. Sci. 10(7), 1097–1109 (2011).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 18 Rook AH, Wood GS, Duvic M, Vonderheid EC, Tobia A, Cabana B. A Phase II placebo-controlled study of photodynamic therapy with topical hypericin and visible light irradiation in the treatment of cutaneous T-cell lymphoma and psoriasis. J. Am. Acad. Dermatol. 63(6), 984–990 (2010).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 19 Yow CM, Tang HM, Chu ES, Huang Z. Hypericin-mediated photodynamic antimicrobial effect on clinically isolated pathogens. Photochem. Photobiol. 88(3), 626–632 (2012).•• This study evaluates the photodynamic antimicrobial effect of hypericin against both Gram-positive and Gram-negative bacteria.
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 20 López-Chicón P, Paz-Cristobal MP, Rezusta A et al. On the mechanism of Candida spp. photoinactivation by hypericin. Photochem. Photobiol. Sci. 11(6), 1099–1107 (2012).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 21 Rezusta A, López-Chicón P, Paz-Cristobal et al. In vitro fungicidal photodynamic effect of hypericin on Candida species. Photochem. Photobiol. 88(3), 613–619 (2012).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 22 Kashef N, Borghei YS, Djavid GE. Photodynamic effect of hypericin on the microorganisms and primary human fibroblasts. Photodiagnosis Photodyn. Ther. 10(2), 150–155 (2013).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 23 Engelhardt V, Krammer B, Plaetzer K. Antibacterial photodynamic therapy using water-soluble formulations of hypericin or mTHPC is effective in inactivation of Staphylococcus aureus. Photochem. Photobiol. Sci. 9(3), 365–369 (2010).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 24 Christensen GD, Simpson WA, Younger JJ et al. Adherence of coagulase-negative staphylococci to plastic tissue culture plates: a quantitative model for the adherence of staphylococci to medical devices. J. Clin. Microbiol. 22(6), 996–1006 (1985).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 25 Stepanovic S, Vukovic D, Dakic I, Savic B, Svabic-Vlahovic MA. Modified microtiter-plate test for quantification of staphylococcal biofilm formation. J. Microbial Methods 40(2), 175–179 (2000).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 26 O'Neill E, Humphreys H, O'Gara JP. Carriage of both the fnbA and fnbB genes and growth at 37°C promote FnBP-mediated biofilm development in methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus clinical isolates. J. Med. Microbiol. 58(Pt 4), 399–402 (2009).
  MedlineGoogle Scholar
• 27 Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute. Performance standards for antimicrobial susceptibility testing, 23 informational supplement. CLSI M100-S23. Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute, PA, USA (2013).
  Google Scholar
• 28 Grinholc M, Szramka B, Kurlenda J, Graczyk A, Bielawski KP. Bactericidal effect of photodynamic inactivation against methicillin-resistant and methicillin-susceptible Staphylococcus aureus is strain-dependent. J. Photochem. Photobiol. B. 90(1), 57–63 (2008).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 29 Andrade MC, Ribeiro AP, Dovigo LN et al. Effect of different pre-irradiation times on curcumin-mediated photodynamic therapy against planktonic cultures and biofilms of Candida spp. Arch. Oral Biol. 58, 200–210 (2013).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 30 Pereira Gonzales F, Maisch T. Photodynamic inactivation for controlling Candida albicans infections. Fungal Biol. 116(1), 1–10 (2012).
  MedlineGoogle Scholar
• 31 Zanin IC, Lobo MM, Rodrigues LK, Pimenta LA, Höfling JF, Gonçalves RB. Photosensitization of in vitro biofilms by toluidine blue O combined with light-emitting diode. Eur. J. Oral Sci. 114(1), 64–69 (2006).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 32 O'Neill E, Pozzi C, Houston P et al. Association between methicillin susceptibility and biofilm regulation in Staphylococcus aureus isolates from device-related infections. J. Clin. Microbiol. 45(5), 1379–1388 (2007).• This study investigates the contribution of genetic background to biofilm development and the relationship between methicillin susceptibility and biofilm phenotype in clinical isolates of S. aureus.
  MedlineGoogle Scholar
• 33 Boyle-Vavra S, Labischinski H, Ebert CC, Ehlert K, Daum RS. A spectrum of changes occurs in peptidoglycan composition of glycopeptide-intermediate clinical Staphylococcus aureus isolates. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 45(1), 280–287 (2001).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 34 Gad F, Zahra T, Hasan T, Hamblin MR. Effects of growth phase and extracellular slime on photodynamic inactivation of Gram-positive pathogenic bacteria. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 48(6), 2173–2178 (2004).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 35 Kishen A, Upadya M, Tegos GP, Hamblin MR. Efflux pump inhibitor potentiates antimicrobial photodynamic inactivation of Enterococcus faecalis biofilm. Photochem. Photobiol. 88(6), 1343–1349 (2010).
  Google Scholar