Efficacy of combination of chlorhexidine and protamine sulphate against device-associated pathogens
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The objectives of this study were to examine: (i) the potential in vitro synergy of combining protamine sulphate (PS) with chlorhexidine (CHX); (ii) the in vitro spectrum and durability of antimicrobial activity of CHX + PS-coated catheters; and (iii) the in vivo efficacy of CHX + PS-coated catheters in comparison with silver-hydrogel-coated and uncoated catheters. METHODS: The potential synergistic antimicrobial and antibiofilm activities of CHX and PS were investigated in vitro by the MIC and biofilm assays. The spectrum and durability of antimicrobial activity of CHX + PS-coated catheters were studied in vitro by using a serial plate transfer method. The in vivo efficacy of CHX + PS-coated catheters was assessed in a rabbit model against Escherichia coli. RESULTS: In vitro studies showed that the combination of CHX + PS has a synergistic inhibitory effect on E. coli and provides a significant synergistic antibiofilm and antimicrobial activity against E. coli, Pseudomonas aeruginosa and Staphylococcus epidermidis. Furthermore, catheters coated with CHX + PS provided a broad-spectrum and enduring in vitro antimicrobial activity over a 10 day period. The in vivo efficacy study demonstrated that subcutaneously implanted CHX + PS-coated catheters in rabbits are significantly less likely to become colonized (2/28 = 7%) than either silver-hydrogel-coated (25/28 = 89%; P < 0.001) or uncoated catheters (18/28 = 64%; P < 0.001) by E. coli. CONCLUSIONS: The synergistic, broad-spectrum and durable in vitro activity of the CHX + PS combination and the robust in vivo efficacy of catheters coated with this unique composition encourage clinical evaluation of this innovative approach.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".