ArticleClinical orthopaedics and related research2017
Does Extracellular DNA Production Vary in Staphylococcal Biofilms Isolated From Infected Implants versus Controls?
Article in Clinical orthopaedics and related research, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
12 citing papers in PubMed, 20 citations in OpenAlex.
- Bacterial Extracellular DNA Production Is Associated with Outcome of Prosthetic Joint Infections.BioMed research international · 2018Trial
- Detecting extracellular G4 DNA motifs in biofilms through energy transfer between DNA-binding dyes TOTO™-1 and SYTO™60.Nucleic acids research · 2026Article
- 5-Fluorouracil modulates motility and biofilm-associated gene expression in Pseudomonas aeruginosa.PloS one · 2026Article
- Alginate Gel Encapsulated with Enzybiotics Cocktail Is Effective against Multispecies Biofilms.Gels (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Evaluation of the polyphenolic profile of native Ecuadorian stingless bee honeys (Current research in food science · 2023Article
- The role of extracellular DNA in the formation, architecture, stability, and treatment of bacterial biofilms.Biotechnology and bioengineering · 2021Review
- Concerted dispersion ofRSC advances · 2021Article
- Thermonucleases Contribute toFrontiers in microbiology · 2021Article
- Microbial Repercussion on Hemodialysis Catheter-Related Bloodstream Infection Outcome: A 2-Year Retrospective Study.Infection and drug resistance · 2021Article
- Implant infections: adhesion, biofilm formation and immune evasion.Nature reviews. Microbiology · 2018Review
- Article
- Letter to the Editor: CORR InsightsClinical orthopaedics and related research · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on byCORR Insights2017
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundProsthetic implant infections caused by Staphylococcus aureus and epidermidis are major challenges for early diagnosis and treatment owing to biofilm formation on the implant surface. Extracellular DNA (eDNA) is actively excreted from bacterial cells in biofilms, contributing to biofilm stability, and may offer promise in the detection or treatment of such infections. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: (1) Does DNA structure change during biofilm formation? (2) Are there time-dependent differences in eDNA production during biofilm formation? (3) Is there differential eDNA production between clinical and control Staphylococcal isolates? (4) Is eDNA production correlated to biofilm thickness?
methodsWe investigated eDNA presence during biofilm formation in 60 clinical and 30 control isolates of S aureus and S epidermidis. The clinical isolates were isolated from patients with infections of orthopaedic prostheses and implants: 30 from infected hip prostheses and 30 from infected knee prostheses. The control isolates were taken from healthy volunteers who had not been exposed to antibiotics and a hospital environment during the previous 3 and 12 months, respectively. Control S epidermidis was isolated from the skin of the antecubital fossa, and control S aureus was isolated from the nares. For the biofilm experiments the following methods were used to detect eDNA: (1) fluorescent staining with 4',6-diamidino-2-phenylindole (DAPI), (2) eDNA extraction using a commercial kit, and (3) confocal laser scanning microscopy for 24-hour biofilm observation using propidium iodide and concanavalin-A staining; TOTO
resultseDNA production as observed by confocal laser scanning microscopy was greater in clinical isolates than controls (clinical isolates mean ± SD: 1.84% ± 1.31%; control mean ± SD: 1.17% ± 1.37%; p < 0.005) after 6 hours of biofilm formation. After 24 hours, the amount of eDNA was greater in biofilms of S epidermidis than in biofilms of S aureus (S aureus mean ± SD: 1.35% ± 2.0%; S epidermidis mean ± SD: 6.42% ± 10.6%; p < 0.05). Clinical isolates of S aureus and S epidermidis produced more eDNA than control isolates at 6 hours of biofilm formation. The extraction method also showed that clinical isolates produced substantially greater amounts of eDNA than controls.
conclusionsS aureus and S epidermidis exhibit a differential production of DNA with time. Clinical isolates associated with implant infections produce greater amounts of eDNA than controls. Future research might focus on the diagnostic value of eDNA as a surrogate laboratory marker for biofilm formation in implant infections. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: eDNA should be considered as a potential future diagnostic tool or even a possible target to modify biofilms for successful treatment of biofilm-associated infections.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.