Search

IntroductionBacterial urinary tract infections (UTI) are among the most common infectious diseases worldwide. The rise of multidrug-resistant (MDR) uropathogenic Escherichia coli (UPEC) UTI cases is a significant threat to healthcare systems. Several probiotic bacteria have been proposed as an alternative to combat MDR UTI. Lactic acid bacteria in the genus Limosilactobacillus are some of the most studied and used probiotics. However, strain-specific effects play a critical role in probiotic properties. L. reuteri KUB-AC5 (AC5), isolated from the chicken gut, confers antimicrobial and immunobiotic effects against some human pathogens. However, the antibacterial and immune modulatory effects of AC5 on UPEC have never been explored.MethodsHere, we investigated both the direct and indirect effects of AC5 against UPEC isolates (UTI89, CFT073, and clinical MDR UPEC AT31) in vitro. Using a spot-on lawn, agar-well diffusion, and competitive growth assays, we found that viable AC5 cells and cell-free components of this probiotic significantly reduced the UPEC growth of all strains tested. The human bladder epithelial cell line UM-UC-3 was used to assess the adhesion and pathogen-attachment inhibition properties of AC5 on UPEC.Results and discussionOur data showed that AC5 can attach to UM-UC-3 and decrease UPEC attachment in a dose-dependent manner. Pretreatment of UPEC-infected murine macrophage RAW264.7 cells with viable AC5 (multiplicity of infection, MOI = 1) for 24 hours enhanced macrophage-killing activity and increased proinflammatory (Nos2, Il6, and Tnfa) and anti-inflammatory (Il10) gene expression. These findings indicate the gut-derived AC5 probiotic could be a potential urogenital probiotic against MDR UTI.

BackgroundPolymerase chain reaction (PCR) is an important means by which to study the urine microbiome and is emerging as possible alternative to urine cultures to identify pathogens that cause urinary tract infection (UTI). However, PCR is limited by its inability to differentiate DNA originating from viable, metabolically active versus non-viable, inactive bacteria. This drawback has led to concerns that urobiome studies and PCR-based diagnosis of UTI are confounded by the presence of relic DNA from non-viable bacteria in urine. Propidium monoazide (PMA) dye can penetrate cells with compromised cell membranes and covalently bind to DNA, rendering it inaccessible to amplification by PCR. Although PMA has been shown to differentiate between non-viable and viable bacteria in various settings, its effectiveness in urine has not been previously studied. We sought to investigate the ability of PMA to differentiate between viable and non-viable bacteria in urine.MethodsVarying amounts of viable or non-viable uropathogenic E. coli (UTI89) or buffer control were titrated with mouse urine. The samples were centrifuged to collect urine sediment or not centrifuged. Urine samples were incubated with PMA and DNA cross-linked using blue LED light. DNA was isolated and uidA gene-specific PCR was performed. For in vivo studies, mice were inoculated with UTI89, followed by ciprofloxacin treatment or no treatment. After the completion of ciprofloxacin treatment, an aliquot of urine was plated on non-selective LB agar and another aliquot was treated with PMA and subjected to uidA-specific PCR.ResultsPMA’s efficiency in excluding DNA signal from non-viable bacteria was significantly higher in bacterial samples in phosphate-buffered saline (PBS, dCT=13.69) versus bacterial samples in unspun urine (dCT=1.58). This discrepancy was diminished by spinning down urine-based bacterial samples to collect sediment and resuspending it in PBS prior to PMA treatment. In 3 of 5 replicate groups of UTI89-infected mice, no bacteria grew in culture; however, there was PCR amplification of E. coli after PMA treatment in 2 of those 3 groups.ConclusionWe have successfully developed PMA-based PCR methods for amplifying DNA from live bacteria in urine. Our results suggest that non-PMA bound DNA from live bacteria can be present in urine, even after antibiotic treatment. This indicates that viable but non-culturable E. coli can be present following treatment of UTI, and may explain why some patients have persistent symptoms but negative urine cultures following UTI treatment.