1、 l : 2002-04-12Te: , 3, 31958 M,) =,p V 3b1V Y 30% ) 00b8 cI|: 1001-8689(2003)01-0055-05% ) 3 # M1 Theformationof thebacterialbiofilmanditsrelativeinfectionandtreatment李学如 贾文祥 杨春Li Xue-ru, Jia Wen-xiang and Yang Chun(四川大学华西基础与法医学院, 成都610041)(Department of Microbiology, Huaxi Basic and ForensicMedica
2、l College,Sichuan University, Chengdu 610041)K1: % ) 3 % ) 3V a 3i7BbA , L= f bVw ,%) 3 VC F0 V ? 3 =%, t%B % T3 V( a distinct and protected biofilm pheno-type),V !KBQ,7 %)“V B 3Q,% )BtyVr 3 F0 “1oTbVw VyBV d F0, #% )3 F0 L,i$B k L13bN, 3 d =, VFL.%W M, V P t% )00a y0 3i ? ,h)2b4 3 M1 n 3 M1% ) %h m
3、, “ -1YV:( 1) 3 ; (2)X 3 , ?,i 3 F )0 b4.1 生物医学材料相关感染的预防1,2,22, 23,27“5 8 =5, U5av 5a 1a a 55V % ) 3 , h )1 $ o )aV $ o )b1#57#S F 3 2003 M128 1 p A ) T, eh )b “ -,h 3 7M 3 ,)bX L , U , F 5, V c 5, Av f ) sL ) 3 Tb a;a 2ZE Vh“ 3 bCosterton F 3 HT 3 b 3 $ , ,h“ 3 , F 3 011%b4.2 药物防治1 3, 23% )X 3 ,5 ?
4、iV 3 F )0 bBtE ,A% ) 3 +s F 3 , “ -X?C BS v F 3 , ? U5 % ) 3 ,h % )bN, v ) 5, V P5 V30%/9%, V4%/0bS v 0 V,i, 3 % )B )T, ? h“ 3 =% )bv = 0S v 0 V5V 3 =% )bV74S v 0 3 =% )b V , 2d 0,X 3 sL )B rb 3 M1% ) %h “5 s %5Bb B% ) X ,% ) 3 7S,1% ) 3 $5 %,1 k b#% ) 3 L.$#% )3 00,s ,Lz “ - M1) ZEb M V ,% ) 3 |.“d
5、 3 3 “1oT,|.“d$ h % ) 3 Kl g 23b ID 1 Costerton J W, Stewart P S, Greenberg E P. Bacterialbiofilm: A common cause of persistent infection J. Sci-ence,1999, 284:1318 2 Watnick P, Kolter R. Biofilm city of microbes J. J Bacte-riol,2000, 182: 2675 3 Davies D G, Parsek M R, Person J P, et al. The involv
6、e-ment of cel-l to-cell signals in the development of a bacterialbiofilm J . Science,1998, 280: 295 4 Prigent-Combaret C, VidalO, Dorel C, et al. Abioticsurfacesensing and biofilm-development regulation of geneexpressionin E. coli J. J Bacteriol,1999,181:5993 5 Pratt L, Kolter R. Geneticanalysis of
7、E. coli biofilm forma-tion J . Mol Microbiol, 1998,30:285 6 OcToole G A, Kolter R. Flagellar and twitching motility arenecessary for P. aeruginosa biofilm development J. MolMicrobiol,1998, 28:449 7 Watnick P A, Kolter R. Steps in thedevelopment of a Vibriocholerae biofilm J . Mol Microbiol, 1999,34:
8、586 8 Gacesa P. Bacterial alginate biosynthesisrecent progress andfuture prospects J. Microbiology, 1998,144:11339 Garrett E S, Perlegas D, Wozniak D J. Negative control offlagellum synthesis in P. aeruginosa is modulated by thealternative sigma factor J. J Bacteriol, 1999, 181( 24):7401 10 Keyhani
9、N O, Roseman S. The chitin catanolic cascade inthemarine bacterium Vibrrio furnissii J . J Biol Chem,1996,271:33414 11 Watnick P I, Fullner K J, Kolter R. A rolefor the mannosesensitive hemagglutinin in biofilm formation by Vibrriocholerae J . J Bacteriol, 1999,18(12) :3606 12 Okabe S, Satoh H. Wata
10、nabe Y. In situ analysis of nitrify-ing biofilm as determined by in situ hybridization andtheuseof microelectrode J. Appl Environ Microbiol, 1999, 65:3182 13 Karen D, Mcfeters G A, Stewart P S. Biofilm resistance toantimicrobial agents J. Microbiology, 2000,146:547 14 Huang T C, Xu K D Stewart P S.
11、Spatial patterns ofalkalinephosphatase expression within bacterial colonies andbiofilm in phosphatestarvation J . Appl Environ Microbi-ol, 1998,64: 1526 15 Xu K D, Stewart P S, Xia F, et al. Spatial physiologicalheterogeneity in P. aeruginosa biofilm is determined by oxy-gen availability J . Appl En
12、viron Microbiol, 1998, 64:4035 16 Moller S, Sternberg C, Andersen J B, et al. In situ geneexpression in mixed-culture biofilm J. Appl EnvironMicrobiol, 1999,65:3182 17 OcToole G A, Kolter R. Initiation of biofilm formation inP. fluorescens proceeds via multiple convergent signalingpathways J. Mol Mi
13、crobiol,1998,28: 449 18 Durrett R, Levin S. Allelopathy in spatially distributed pop-ulations J . J T heor Biol,1997,185:165 19 Riley M, Zusman D R. Molecular mechanisms of bacteriocinevolution J . Annu Rev Genet,1998, 32:255 20 Shi W, Zusman D R. Fatal attraction J. Nature, 1993,366:414 21 Allison
14、D G, Ruiz B, SanjoseC, et al. Extrecellar products#58#% ) 3 # M1 as mediators of the formation and detachment of P. f luo-rescens biofilm J. FEMS Microbiol Lett, 1998, 167: 179 22 Rodney M D. Biofilm and device-associated infections J.Emerg Infect Dis,2001,7:27723 Potera C. Forging a link between bi
15、ofilm and disease J.Science,1999, 283:1873 24 Xu X, Stewart P S, Huang C C. Transport limitation ofchlorine disinfection of P. aeruginosa entrapped in alginatebeads J . Biotechnol Bioeng,1996,49: 93 25 Stewart P S, Grab L, Diemet JA. Analysis if biocidetrans-port limitation in an artificialbiofilm J
16、. J Appl Microbiol,1998,85: 495 26 Wentland E J, Stewart P S, Huang C T, et al. Spatial var-iations in growth rate within K. pneumoniae colonies andbiofilm J. Biotechnol Prog,1996, 12:316 27 Wang R, Pei F, Chai D, et al. The influence ofcharithromycin on bioflim of P. aeruginosa J . Chin JA ntibiot,
17、2002,27( 5) :293 (in Chinese)( 5:) analysis indicated that the cloned genewas identical to the C5-O-methyltransferase genein S. avermi-tilis. Thegene replacement vector, pHJ5803 (apra+ ), was constructed and introduced into S. avermitilis by con-jugation. Thegene replacement strain Bjbm0006, which n
18、o longer produce theavermectin A, was obtained and con-firmed.KEYWORDS Avermectin; C5-O-methyltransferase; Streptomyces avermitilis( 19:)ABSTRACT A HPLC method for determination of panipenem/betamipron for C18(5Lm, 200mm 416mm),mobilephase: 0102 mol/L phosphate buffer (pH8. 0) ) acetonitrile ( 97B3)
19、, temperature: 45e , detection wave-length: 260nm. The standard curves were linear within the range of 119 478Lg/ml and 126 505ug/ ml forpanipenem and betamiprom respectively. The precisions in a day ( RSD) were 014% and 015% respectively. Therecovery rates were9918% and 10010% respectively. The ass
20、ay results agreed with thoseobtained by using theoff-icial method.KEYWORDS HPLC; Panipenem; Betamipron; Content determination( 31:) inf luenzae, Staphylococcus aureus containing methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA)and Escherichia coli was slightly superior to that of imipenem; however,
21、 its antibacterial activity against Pseu-domonas aeruginosia was about 1/4 that of imipenem. The antimicrobial activity of panipenem and imipenem againstGram-negativebacteria such as Klebsiella pneumoniae and Enterobacter spp was slightly inferior to meropenem, su-perior to that of ceftazidime, cefo
22、perazone/sulbactam and oxacillin. Theactivity of panipenem was affected by thein-oculum size, pH of medium and adding of serum. Panipenem was thefeasible antibiotics in treating hospita-l acquiredinfection caused by mult-i resistant bacteria, and the severe mix infections of aerobic and anaerobic bacteria.KEYWORDS Panipenem/betamipron; Imipenem/cilastatin; Meropenem; In vitro antibacterial activity#59#S F 3 2003 M128 1
