Search

Bacterial adhesion and subsequent biofilm formation on biomedical implants and devices are a major cause of their failure. As systemic antibiotic treatment is often ineffective, there is an urgent need for antimicrobial biomaterials and coatings. The term "antimicrobial" can encompass different mechanisms of action (here termed "antimicrobial surface designs"), such as antimicrobial-releasing, contact-killing or non-adhesivity. Biomaterials equipped with antimicrobial surface designs based on different mechanisms of action require different in vitro evaluation methods. Available industrial standard evaluation tests do not address the specific mechanisms of different antimicrobial surface designs and have therefore been modified over the past years, adding to the myriad of methods available in the literature to evaluate antimicrobial surface designs. The aim of this review is to categorize fourteen presently available methods including industrial standard tests for the in vitro evaluation of antimicrobial surface designs according to their suitability with respect to their antimicrobial mechanism of action. There is no single method or industrial test that allows to distinguish antimicrobial designs according to all three mechanisms identified here. However, critical consideration of each method clearly relates the different methods to a specific mechanism of antimicrobial action. It is anticipated that use of the provided table with the fourteen methods will avoid the use of wrong methods for evaluating new antimicrobial designs and therewith facilitate translation of novel antimicrobial biomaterials and coatings to clinical use. The need for more and better updated industrial standard tests is emphasized., Statement of Significance: European COST-action TD1305, IPROMEDAI aims to provide better understanding of mechanisms of antimicrobial surface designs of biomaterial implants and devices. Current industrial evaluation standard tests do not sufficiently account for different, advanced antimicrobial surface designs, yet are urgently needed to obtain convincing in vitro data for approval of animal experiments and clinical trials. This review aims to provide an innovative and clear guide to choose appropriate evaluation methods for three distinctly different mechanisms of antimicrobial design: (1) antimicrobial-releasing, (2) contact-killing and (3) non-adhesivity. Use of antimicrobial evaluation methods and definition of industrial standard tests, tailored toward the antimicrobial mechanism of the design, as identified here, fulfill a missing link in the translation of novel antimicrobial surface designs to clinical use., (Copyright © 2018 Acta Materialia Inc. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Infection is a major cause of failure of inserted or implanted biomedical devices (biomaterials). During surgery, bacteria may adhere to the implant, initiating biofilm formation. Bacteria are also observed in and recultured from the tissue surrounding implants, and may even reside inside host cells. Whether these bacteria originate from biofilms is not known. Therefore, we investigated the fate of Staphylococcus epidermidis inoculated on the surface of implants as adherent planktonic cells or as a biofilm in mouse experimental biomaterial-associated infection. In order to discriminate the challenge strain from potential contaminating mouse microflora, we constructed a fully virulent green fluorescent S. epidermidis strain. S. epidermidis injected along subcutaneous titanium implants, pre-seeded on the implants or pre-grown as biofilm, were retrieved from the implants as well as the surrounding tissue in all cases after 4days, and in histology bacteria were observed in the tissue co-localizing with macrophages. Thus, bacteria adherent to or in a biofilm on the implant are a potential source of infection of the surrounding tissue, and antimicrobial strategies should prevent both biofilm formation and tissue colonization., (Copyright © 2014 Acta Materialia Inc. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)