April 2010
Volume 51, Issue 13
Free
ARVO Annual Meeting Abstract  |   April 2010
Bacterial Adherence and Structural Organization of Staphylococcus Epidermidis Biofilm on Different Types of Intraocular Lenses Under in vitro Flow Conditions
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • S. A. Baillif
    Ophthalmology, Saint Roch Hospital, Nice, France
    Bacteriology and biomaterials,
    Laboratory UPSP 2007.03.135 RTI2B « Biomaterials and Matrix Remodeling», Claude Bernard-Lyon 1 University, Lyon, France
  • F. Renaud
    Bacteriology,
    Laboratory UPSP 2007.03.135 RTI2B « Biomaterials and Matrix Remodeling», Claude Bernard-Lyon 1 University, Lyon, France
  • D. J. Hartmann
    Bacteriology,
    Laboratory UPSP 2007.03.135 RTI2B « Biomaterials and Matrix Remodeling», Claude Bernard-Lyon 1 University, Lyon, France
  • L. Kodjikian
    Ophthalmology, Croix-Rousse University Hospital, Lyon, France
    Bacteriology, Laboratory UPSP 2007.03.135 RTI2B « Biomaterials and Matrix Remodeling», Claude Bernard-Lyon 1 University,, Lyon, France
  • Footnotes
    Commercial Relationships  S.A. Baillif, None; F. Renaud, None; D.J. Hartmann, None; L. Kodjikian, None.
  • Footnotes
    Support  None.
Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science April 2010, Vol.51, 2897. doi:
  • Views
  • Share
  • Tools
    • Alerts
      ×
      This feature is available to authenticated users only.
      Sign In or Create an Account ×
    • Get Citation

      S. A. Baillif, F. Renaud, D. J. Hartmann, L. Kodjikian; Bacterial Adherence and Structural Organization of Staphylococcus Epidermidis Biofilm on Different Types of Intraocular Lenses Under in vitro Flow Conditions. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2010;51(13):2897.

      Download citation file:


      © ARVO (1962-2015); The Authors (2016-present)

      ×
  • Supplements
Abstract

Purpose: : To compare, under in vitro flow conditions, the adherence and structural organization of Staphylococcus epidermidis biofilm on intraocular lenses (IOLs) made of four different biomaterials (polymethylmethacrylate, silicone, hydrophilic acrylic or hydrophobic acrylic).

Methods: : IOLs were placed into a bioreactor designed to replicate intraocular conditions. The model consisted in a Tygon tubing connected to a vial. Three septa, placed along the Tygon tubing, allowed respectively the artificial aqueous humor’s arrival, its elimination and the bacterial suspension’s inoculation. A first pump allowed the aqueous humor movement along the circuit, whereas a second one regulated the flow at which the nutritive environment was regenerated. The whole circuit was placed in a 34°C water bath. At different times (2h, 4h, 6h, 8h, 12h), lenses were taken from this environment. Scanning electron microscopy (SEM) was used to count the bound bacteria and to analyze the structural biofilm architecture.

Results: : The model provided the kinetic of Staphylococcus epidermidis biofilm growth on IOLs made of four different biomaterials. The differences among IOLs were statistically significant from 4h to 6h. Adherence was statistically weakest on the hydrophilic acrylic polymer. From 8h to 12h, the biofilm was too thick to allow an accurate assessment of the bound bacteria. The structural biofilm architecture was modulated by IOLs biomaterials.

Conclusions: : Bacterial adhesion and biofilm development to the implant surface must depend on the hydrophobicity or hydrophilicity of the biomaterial. The data suggest that hydrophilic IOLs can help decreasing implant-associated bacterial endophthalmitis as a result of their surface properties.

Keywords: intraocular lens • endophthalmitis • bacterial disease 
×
×

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

Sign in or purchase a subscription to access this content. ×

You must be signed into an individual account to use this feature.

×