Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33401282›Full record

ArticleUrologia internationalis2021

Anti-Biofilm Effect of Octenidine and Polyhexanide on Uropathogenic Biofilm-Producing Bacteria.

Maria Loose, Kurt G Naber, Larry Purcell, Manfred P Wirth, Florian M E Wagenlehner

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Urologia internationalis, 2021. 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
2.4field-weighted citation impact, top 11% of its field
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, 21 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Antibiofilm Properties of Antiseptic Agents Used onInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2022
    Article
  6. Frontiers in microbiology · 2022
    Article
  7. Article
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

5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Maria LooseClinic for Urology, Paediatric Urology and Andrology, Justus-Liebig University of Giessen, Giessen, Germany, maria.loose@chiru.med.uni-giessen.de.
Kurt G NaberDepartment of Urology, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany.
Larry PurcellSaxonia R&D, Radeberg, Germany.
Manfred P WirthDepartment of Urology, Technical University of Dresden, Dresden, Germany.
Florian M E WagenlehnerClinic for Urology, Paediatric Urology and Andrology, Justus-Liebig University of Giessen, Giessen, Germany.
Justus-Liebig-Universität Gießen · DETechnical University of Munich · DETechnische Universität Dresden · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundA catheter allowing a release of antibacterial substances such as antiseptics into the bladder could be a new way of preventing biofilm formation and subsequent catheter-associated urinary tract infections.

methodsMinimal inhibitory and bactericidal concentration (MIC/MBC) determinations in cation-adjusted Mueller-Hinton broth and artificial urine were performed for 4 antiseptics against 3 uropathogenic biofilm producers, Escherichia coli, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, and Proteus mirabilis. Furthermore, effects of octenidine and polyhexanide against catheter biofilm formation were determined by quantification of biofilm-producing bacteria.

resultsSodium hypochlorite showed MIC/MBC values between 200 and 800 mg/L for all strains tested. Triclosan was efficient against E. coli and P. mirabilis (MIC ≤2.98 mg/L) but ineffective against P. aeruginosa. Octenidine and polyhexanide showed antibacterial activity against all 3 species tested (MIC 1.95-7.8 and 3.9-31.25 mg/L). Both octenidine and polyhexanide were able to prevent biofilm formation on catheter segments in a concentration dependent manner. Furthermore, adding 250 mg/L of each biocide disrupted biofilms formed by E. coli and P. mirabilis, whereas even 500 mg/L was not sufficient to completely destroy P. aeruginosa biofilms.

conclusionOctenidine- and polyhexanide-containing antiseptics showed a broad effect against typical uropathogenic biofilm producers even in high dilutions. This study provides a basis for further investigation of the potential of octenidine and polyhexanide as prophylaxis or treatment of catheter biofilms.

Indexed as

Anti-Infective Agents, LocalBiguanidesBiofilmsDisinfectantsEscherichia coliIminesMicrobial Sensitivity TestsProteus mirabilisPseudomonas aeruginosaPyridinesUrinary CathetersUrinary Tract InfectionsAnti-Infective Agents, LocalBiguanidesDisinfectantsIminesoctenidinepolihexanidePyridinesAntisepticsCatheter biofilmUrinary tract infection

Identifiers

PMID33401282
PMCPMC8006580
OpenAlexW3120416698

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.