Results of the Proliferative Activity’s Analysis of Bifidobacterium Exometabolites in Regard to Hospital Isolates from Patients after Vascular Synthetic Prosthetics Implantation

Abstract:

Problems ofdevelopment of purulent septic complications in vascular surgery during the usage of synthetic prosthetics for shunting and arterial prosthetics are described in this work.Leading factors of development of prosthetic infection are described. Specialties of diagnostics and bacteriological researches wound discharge of wound’s discharge are shown. Tactics of complex treatment of patients with prosthetic infection are presented. This work is dedicated to the experimental researchof proliferative activityof the most encountered opportunistic microorganisms found from the patients of vascular surgery profile with purulent septical complications under the influence of bifidobacteriumbifidium’sexometabolites. Presented results proof the submission of proliferative activity of the most widespread antibiotic-resistant hospital’s isolates under the influence of bifidobacteriumbifidium’sexometabolites.Evaluation during the experiment in vitro of the influence of bifidobacteriumbifidium’sexometabolites on proliferative activityof opportunistic microorganisms.

• Periodical: Journal of Biomimetics, Biomaterials and Biomedical Engineering (Volume 46)
• Pages: 60-66
• DOI: https://doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/JBBBE.46.60
• Online since: June 2020
• Authors: Artem Yurinov, Tatyana Timokhina, Dmitrii Nekrasov, Alexander Sokolyuk, Sergeii Svetkin, Anastasiia Inozemtseva
• Keywords: Arterial Prosthetics, Bifidobacterium Bifidium, Exometabolites, Infection of Prosthetics, Proliferative Activity, Purulent Septic Complications, Septical Complications, Vascular Surgery

References

[1] Brewster DC. Clinical and anatomic considerations for surgery in aortoiliac disease and results of surgical treatment. Circulation. 1991; 83(Sup.): 42.

[2] Veith F.J., Gupta S.K. et al. Six year prospective multicenter randomized comparison of autologous saphenous vein and expanded polytetrafluoroethylene grafts in infrainguinal arterial reconstructions. J. Vase Surg. 1986; 3: 104.

DOI: 10.1201/9780429434020-26

[3] Darouiche R.O. Treatment of infections associated with surgical implants. N. Engl. J. Med. 2004; 350:1422-1429.

DOI: 10.1056/nejmra035415

[4] Hasse B., Hussmann L., Zinkernagel A., Weber R. et al. Vascular graft infections. Swiss. Med. Wkly. 2013; 24: 143.

DOI: 10.4414/smw.2013.13754

[5] Grigoryan G.R., Ivanov A.A., Arakelyan V.S. Infection of aortal explants: reasons and methods of treatment. Herald of Experimental and Clinical Surgery. 2011; 4(3): 600-604.

[6] Romanovich A.V., Khyschanovish V.Y. Paraprosthetic infection in vascular surgery: contemporary condition of the problem. News of surgery. 2017; 25 (3): 292-299.

[7] Hick R.C.J., Greenhaigh R.M. The pathogenesis of Vascular Graft infection. Eur. J. Surg. & Endovascular Surg. 1997; 14: 5-10.

[8] Tannenbaum G.A. et al. Safety of vein bypass grafting to the dorsal pedal artery in diabetic patients with foot infections. J. Vasc. Surg. 1992; 15 (6): 982-988.

DOI: 10.1016/0741-5214(92)90454-g

[9] Fiorani P., Speziale F., Rizzo L. et al. Detection of aortic graft infection with leukocytes labeled with technetium 99-m hexametazime. J. Vasc. Surg. 1993; 17: 87-95.

DOI: 10.1016/0741-5214(93)90012-b

[10] Bruggink J.L., Glaudemans A.W., Saleem B.R., Meerwaldt R. et al. Accuracy of FDG-PET-CT in the diagnostic work-up of vascular prosthetic graft infection. Eur. J. Vasc. Endovasc. Surg. 2010; 40: 348-354.

DOI: 10.1016/j.ejvs.2010.05.016

[11] Saleem B.R., Meerwaldt R., Tielliu I.F., Verhoeven E.L. et al. Conservative treatment of vascular prosthetic graft infection is associated with high mortality. Am. J. Surg. 2010; 200 (1): 47-52.

DOI: 10.1016/j.amjsurg.2009.05.018

[12] Lyzikov A.A. Surgical tactics in infection of artificial vascular prosthetics. News of Surgery, vol. 29 (1), 120-126.

[13] Gabriel M., Pukacki F., Dzieciuchowicz L. et al. Cryopreserved arterial allografts in the treatment of prosthetic graft infections. Eur. J. Vasc. Endovasc. Surg. 2004; 27 (2) : 590-596.

DOI: 10.1016/j.ejvs.2004.02.016

[14] Nevelsteen A. et al. Experience with cryopreserved arterial allografts in the treatment of prosthetic graft infections. Cardiovasc. Surg. 1998; 4: 378-382.

DOI: 10.1016/s0967-2109(98)00014-3

[15] O'Connor S., Andrew P., Batt M., Becquemin J.P. A systematic review and meta-analysis of treatments for aortic graft infection. J. Vasc. Surg. 2006; 44: 38-45.

DOI: 10.1016/j.jvs.2006.02.053

[16] Bondarenko V.M., Rybalchenko O.V. Analysis of prophylactic and therapeutic effect of probiotical drugs from the point of new scientific technologies. The Magazine of Michrobiology. 2015; 2: 90-104.

[17] Zaycev A.A., Karpov O.I., Sidorenko S.V. Staphilococcus and Vancomycin: Tendency of Standoff. Antibiotics and Chemotherapy 2003; 48 (6): 20-26.

[18] Skoulas G., Moellering R.C.Jr., Eliopoulos G.M. Adaptation of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus in the face of vancomycin therapy. Clin. Infect. Dis. 2006; 42 (Suppl. 1): 40-50.

DOI: 10.1086/491713

[19] Baimagambetov S.A., Balgazarov A.S., Ramazanov Z.K., Markov A.A., Ponomarev A.A., Turgumbayeva R.K. Abdikarimov M.N. Modern models of endoprostheses and periprosthetic infection. Biomedical Research (India). 2018; 29: Iss.11.

DOI: 10.4066/biomedicalresearch.37-18-476

[20] Bukharin O.V., Perunova N.B. Symbiotic interactions of man and microorganisms. Physiology of Man. 2012; 38 (1): 128-138.

[21] Wagner R.D., Balish E. Potencial hazards of probiotic bacteria for immunodeficient pacients. Bul. Inst. Pasteur (France). 1998; 96 (3): 165-170.

DOI: 10.1016/s0020-2452(98)80011-0

[22] Markov A.A., Timokhina T.H., Perunova N.B., Malyugina O.A. Production technique of bifidobacterium's exometabolites with high antimicrobial activity towards Staphylococcus aureus. Sys. Rev. Pharm. 2020; 11(2): 273-277.

[23] Bandyk D.F., Berni G.A. et al. Aortofemoral graft infection due to Staphylococcus epidermidis. Arch. Surg. 1984; 119: 102-108.

DOI: 10.1001/archsurg.1984.01390130084015

[24] Calligaro K.D. et al. Selective preservation of infected prosthetic arterial grafts: analysis of a 20-year experience with 120 extracavitary-infected grafts. Ann. Surg. 1994; 220(4): 461-469.

DOI: 10.1097/00000658-199410000-00005

[25] Topel I., Audebert F., Betz T., Steinbauer M. G. Microbial Spectrum and Primary Resistance to Rifampicin in Infectious Complications in Vascular Surgery: Limits to the Use of Rifampicin-Bonded Prosthetic Grafts. Angiology. 2010; 61: 423-426.

DOI: 10.1177/0003319709360029

[26] Frei E. Hodgkiss-Harlow K. Rossi P.J. Edmiston C.Jr., Bandyk DF. Microbial pathogenesis of bacterial biofilms: a causative factor of vascular surgical site infection. Vasc. Endovascular Surg. 2011; 45(8) :688-96.

DOI: 10.1177/1538574411419528

[27] Geary KJ, et al. Differential effects of a gram-negative and a grampositive infection on autogenous and prosthetic grafts. J Vasc Surg 1990; 11(2): 339–345; discussion 346–347.

DOI: 10.1067/mva.1990.17626