↓ Skip to main content

Eradication of P. aeruginosa biofilm in endotracheal tubes based on lock therapy: results from an in vitro study

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Infectious Diseases, December 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
5 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
34 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Eradication of P. aeruginosa biofilm in endotracheal tubes based on lock therapy: results from an in vitro study
Published in
BMC Infectious Diseases, December 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12879-017-2856-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

María Jesús Pérez-Granda, María Consuelo Latorre, Beatriz Alonso, Javier Hortal, Rafael Samaniego, Emilio Bouza, María Guembe

Abstract

Despite the several strategies available for the management of biofilm-associated ventilator-associated pneumonia, data regarding the efficacy of applying antibiotics to the subglottic space (SS) are scarce. We created an in vitro model to assess the efficacy of antibiotic lock therapy (ALT) applied in the SS for eradication of Pseudomonas aeruginosa biofilm in endotracheal tubes (ETTs). We applied 2 h of ALT to a P. aeruginosa biofilm in ETTs using a single dose (SD) and a 5-day therapy model (5D). We used sterile saline lock therapy (SLT) as the positive control. We compared colony count and the percentage of live cells between both models. The median (IQR) cfu counts/ml and percentage of live cells in the SD-ALT and SD-SLT groups were, respectively, 3.12 × 105 (9.7 × 104-0) vs. 8.16 × 107 (7.0 × 107-0) (p = 0.05) and 53.2% (50.9%-57.2%) vs. 91.5% (87.3%-93.9%) (p < 0.001). The median (IQR) cfu counts/ml and percentage of live cells in the 5D-ALT and 5D-SLT groups were, respectively, 0 (0-0) vs. 3.2 × 107 (2.32 × 107-0) (p = 0.03) and 40.6% (36.6%-60.0%) vs. 90.3% (84.8%-93.9%) (p < 0.001). We demonstrated a statistically significant decrease in the viability of P. aeruginosa biofilm after application of 5D-ALT in the SS. Future clinical studies to assess ALT in patients under mechanical ventilation are needed.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 34 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 34 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 5 15%
Student > Master 5 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 9%
Student > Postgraduate 3 9%
Other 2 6%
Other 5 15%
Unknown 11 32%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 6 18%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 12%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 6%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 6%
Other 4 12%
Unknown 14 41%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 11 December 2017.
All research outputs
#18,577,751
of 23,009,818 outputs
Outputs from BMC Infectious Diseases
#5,653
of 7,722 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#326,994
of 439,388 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Infectious Diseases
#112
of 155 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,009,818 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,722 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.2. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 439,388 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 155 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.