Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33176843›Full record

ArticleJournal of orthopaedic surgery and research2020

Highly variable effect of sonication to dislodge biofilm-embedded Staphylococcus epidermidis directly quantified by epifluorescence microscopy: an in vitro model study.

Erik T Sandbakken, Eivind Witsø, Bjørnar Sporsheim, Kjartan W Egeberg, Olav A Foss, Linh Hoang, Geir Bjerkan, Kirsti Løseth, Kåre Bergh

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Effect of sonication on staphylococcal and gram-negative biofilms relevant to prosthetic joint infections: an in vitro study.Brazilian journal of microbiology : [publication of the Brazilian Society for Microbiology] · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Erik T SandbakkenDepartment of Orthopedic surgery, St Olav's University Hospital, Trondheim, Norway. erik.thorvaldsen.sandbakken@stolav.no.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7947-5460
Eivind WitsøDepartment of Orthopedic surgery, St Olav's University Hospital, Trondheim, Norway.
Bjørnar SporsheimCellular and Molecular Imaging Core Facility (CMIC), Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim, Norway.
Kjartan W EgebergCellular and Molecular Imaging Core Facility (CMIC), Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim, Norway.
Olav A FossNeuromedicine and Movement Science (INB), Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim, Norway.
Linh HoangCellular and Molecular Imaging Core Facility (CMIC), Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim, Norway.
Geir BjerkanDepartment of Orthopedic surgery, St Olav's University Hospital, Trondheim, Norway.
Kirsti LøsethDepartment of Clinical and Molecular Medicine, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim, Norway.
Kåre BerghDepartment of Clinical and Molecular Medicine, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim, Norway.

Funding

St. Olavs Hospital Universitetssykehuset i Trondheim P-101926-20
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn cases of prosthetic joint infections, culture of sonication fluid can supplement culture of harvested tissue samples for correct microbial diagnosis. However, discrepant results regarding the increased sensitivity of sonication have been reported in several studies. To what degree bacteria embedded in biofilm are dislodged during the sonication process has to our knowledge not been fully elucidated. In the present in vitro study, we have evaluated the effect of sonication as a method to dislodge biofilm by quantitative microscopy.

methodsWe used a standard biofilm method to cover small steel plates with biofilm forming Staphylococcus epidermidis ATCC 35984 and carried out the sonication procedure according to clinical practice. By comparing area covered with biofilm before and after sonication with epifluorescence microscopy, the effect of sonication on biofilm removal was quantified. Two series of experiments were made, one with 24-h biofilm formation and another with 72-h biofilm formation. Confocal laser scanning microscopy (CLSM) and scanning electron microscopy (SEM) were used to confirm whether bacteria were present after sonication. In addition, quantitative bacteriology of sonication fluid was performed.

resultsEpifluorescence microscopy enabled visualization of biofilm before and after sonication. CLSM and SEM confirmed coccoid cells on the surface after sonication. Biofilm was dislodged in a highly variable manner.

conclusionThere is an unexpected high variation seen in the ability of sonication to dislodge biofilm-embedded S. epidermidis in this in vitro model.

Indexed as

Microscopy, FluorescenceBiofilmsIn Vitro TechniquesMicroscopy, ConfocalMicroscopy, Electron, ScanningSonicationStaphylococcus epidermidisTime FactorsBiofilm formationConfocal microscopyElectron microscopyFluorescence microscopySonicationStaphylococcus epidermidis

Identifiers

PMID33176843
PMCPMC7661210

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.