Lactoferrin increases the susceptibility of S. epidermidis biofilms to lysozyme and vancomycin

References

• Driebe WT, Mandelbraum S, Forster RK, Schwartz LK and Culbertson WW. Pseudophakic endophthalmitis: diagnosis and management. Ophthalmology. 1986;93: 442–8.
   Google Scholar
• Shrader SK, Band JD, Lauter CB and Murphy P. The clinical spectrum of endophthalmitis: incidence, predis-posing factors and features influencing outcome. J In-fect Dis. 1990;162:115–20.
   Google Scholar
• Heaven CJ, Mann PJ and Boase DL. Endophthalmitis following extracapsular cataract surgery: a review of 32 cases. Br J Ophthalmol. 1992;76: 419–23.
   Google Scholar
• Cohen EJ, Gonzalez C, Leavitt KG, Arentsen JJ and Laibson PR. Corneal ulcers associated with contact lenses including experience with disposable lenses. CLAO J. 1991;17:173–176.
   Google Scholar
• Leitch EC, Harmis NY, Corrigan KM and Willcox MDP. Identification and enumeration of staphylococci from the eye during soft contact lens wear. Optom Vis Sci. 1998;75:258–265.
   Google Scholar
• Leitch EC and Willcox MDP. Lactoferrin and lysozyme exhibit synergistic anti-staphylococcal properties. J Med Microbiol. 1998;47:837–842.
   Google Scholar
• Ellison III RT and Giehl TJ. Killing of Gram-negative bacteria by lactoferrin and lysozyme. J Clin Invest. 1991; 88:1080–1091.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Naidu AS and Arnold RR. Lactoferrin interaction with Salmonellae potentiates antibiotic susceptibility in vitro. Diag Microbiol Infect Dis. 1994;20:69–75.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Olsen JC, Flynn HW Jr, Forster RK and Culbertson WW. Results in the treatment of postoperative endophthalmitis. Ophthalmology. 1983;90:692–699.
   Google Scholar
• Bode DD Jr, Gelender H and Forster RK. A retrospec-tive review of endophthalmitis due to coagulase-nega-tive staphylococci. Br J Ophthalmol. 1985;69:915–9.
   Google Scholar
• Jett BD, Jensen HG, Atkuri RV and Gilmore MS. Evaluation of therapeutic measures for treating endophthalmitis caused by isogenic toxin-producing and toxin-nonproducing Enterococcus faecalis strains. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 1995;36:9–15.
   Google Scholar
• Smith MA, Sorenson JA, Smith C, Miller M and Borenstein M. Effects of intravitreal dexamethasone on concentration of intravitreal vancomycin in experimen-tal methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus epidermidis endophthalmitis. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1991;35: 1298–1302.
   Google Scholar
• Rossetti SB and D'Alessandro LP. Antibiotic resistance of Staphylococcus spp. according to the source of ocu-lar samples. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci Abstract Book. 1997; #2030.
   Google Scholar
• Han DP, Wisniewski SR, Wilson LA, Barza M, Vine AK, Doft BH and Kelsey SF. Spectrum and susceptibilities of microbiologic isolates in the endophthalmitis vitrectomy study. Am J Ophthalmol. 1996;122:1–17.
   Google Scholar
• Gristina AG, Jennings RA, Naylor PT, Myrvik QN and Webb LX. Comparative in vitro antibiotic resistance of surface-colonizing coagulase negative staphylococci. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1989;33: 813–816.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vergeres P and Blaser J. Amikacin, ceftazidine and flucloxacillin against suspended and adherent Pseudomo-nas aeruginosa and Staphylococcus epidermidis in an in vitro model of infection. J Infect Dis. 1992; 165:281–289.
   Google Scholar
• Bergamini TM, McCurry TM, Bernard JD, Hoeg KL, Corpus RA, Peyton JC, Brittian KR and Cheadle WG. Antibiotic efficacy against Staphylococcus epidermidis adherent to vascular grafts. J Sur Res. 1996;60:3–6.
   Google Scholar
• Leitch EC and Willcox MDP. Interactions between the constitutive host defences of tears and Staphylococcus epidermidis. Aust N Z Ophthalmol. 1997; (Suppl 1), 25: 20–22.
   Google Scholar
• Soboh F, Khoury AE, Zamboni AC, Davidson D and Mittelman MW. Effects of ciprofloxacin and protamine sulfate combinations against catheter-associated Pseudo-monas aeruginosa biofilms. Antimicrob Agents Che-mother. 1995;39:1281–1286.
   Google Scholar
• Watanakunakorn C. The antibacterial action of vanco-mycin. Rev Infect Dis. 1981; 3 (Suppl):210–215.
   Google Scholar
• Spik G, Cheron A, Montreuil J and Dolby JM. Bacteri-ostasis of a milk-sensitive strain of Escherichia coli by immunoglobulins and iron-binding proteins in associa-tion. Immunology. 1978;35:663–671.
   Google Scholar
• Carter P. Spectrophotometric determination of serum iron at the submicrogram level with a new reagent (ferrozine). Anal Biochem. 1971;40:450–458.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Christensen GD, Simpson WA Bisno AL and Beachey EH. Adherence of slime-producing strains of Staphylo-coccus epidermidis to smooth surfaces. Infect Immun. 1982;37:318–326.
   Google Scholar
• Ellison RT III, Giehl TJ and LaForce FM. Damage of the outer membrane of enteric Gram-negative bacteria by lactoferrin and transferrin. Infect Immun. 1988;56: 2774–2781.
   Google Scholar
• Lee CK, Rubin LG and Moldwin RM. Synergy between protamine and vancomycin in the treatment of Staphy-lococcus epidermidis biofilms. Urology. 1995;45:720–724.
   Google Scholar
• Teichman JM. Protamine sulphate and vancomycin are synergistic against Staphylococcus epidermidis prosthe-sis infections in vivo. J Urol. 1994;152:213–216.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yeaman MR, Norman DC and Bayer AS. Platelet mi-crobicidal protein enhances antibiotic-induced killing of and postantibiotic effect in Staphylococcus aureus. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1992;36:1665–1670.
   Google Scholar
• Dunne WM. Jr, Mason EO. Jr and Kaplin SL. Diffusion of rifampicin and vancomycin through a Staphylococ-cus epidermidis biofilm. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1993;37:2522–2526.
   Google Scholar
• Sanyal D, Williams AJ, Johnson AP and George RC. The emergence of vancomycin resistance in renal dialysis. J Hosp Infect. 1993;24:167–173.
   Google Scholar
• Ginsburg I and Sela MN. The role of leukocytes and their hydrolases in the persistence, degradation and transport of bacterial constituents in tissues: relation to chronic inflammatory processes in staphylococcal, streptococcal and mycobacterial infections and in chronic periodontal disease. Grit Rev Microbiol. 1976;4:249–332.
   Google Scholar
• Johansen C, Gill T and Gram L. Antibacterial effect of protamine assayed by impedimetry. J Appl Bacteriol. 1995;78:297–303.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Metcalf RH and Deibel RH. Growth of Streptococcus faecium in the presence of lysozyme. Infect Immun. 1972;6:178–183.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Evans RC and Holmes CI Effect of vancomycin hydro-chloride on Staphylococcus epidermidis biofilm associated with silicone elastomer. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1987;31:889–894.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Leitch EC and Willcox MDP. Elucidation of the antistaphylococcal mechanism of lactoferrin and lyso-zyme. J Med Microbiol. 1999; In Press.
   Google Scholar
• Sahm DF and Washington JA II. Antibacterial suscepti-bility tests: dilution methods. In Balows A, Hausler WJ Jr, Hellmann KL, Isenberg HD, and Shadomy HJ eds. Manual of clinical microbiology, 5th ed. American So-ciety for Microbiology, Washington DC; 1991: 1105–1116.
   Google Scholar
• Homer P, Peyman GA, Koziol J and Sanders D. Intra-vitreal injection of vancomycin in experimental staphy-lococcal endophthalmitis. Acta Ophthalmol. 1975;53:311–320.
   Google Scholar
• Smith MA, Sorenson JA, Lowy FD, Shaku JL, Harrison W and Jakbiec FA. Treatment of experimental methicil-lin-resistant S. epidermidis endophthalmitis with intra-vitreal vancomycin. Ophthalmology. 1986;93:1328–1335.
   Google Scholar
• Pflugfelder SC, Hernandez E, Fliesler SJ, Alvarez J, Pflugfelder ME and Forster RK. Intravitreal vancomy-cin. Arch Ophthalmol. 1987;105:831–837.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar