MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2332341352 · doi:10.1097/opx.0000000000000549

Efficacy of Antimicrobials against Biofilms of <i>Achromobacter</i> and <i>Pseudomonas</i>

2015· article· en· W2332341352 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueOptometry and Vision Science · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicBacterial biofilms and quorum sensing
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAchromobacter xylosoxidansBiofilmPseudomonas aeruginosaMicrobiologyChemistryBacteriaBenzalkonium chlorideContact lensAntimicrobialBiologyMedicineChromatography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: Achromobacter xylosoxidans and Pseudomonas aeruginosa biofilms can develop in ophthalmic products and accessories such as contact lens cases, leading to the development of ocular infections. This study evaluated the efficacy of the antimicrobials polyaminopropyl biguanide (PAPB) and benzalkonium chloride (BAK) against A. xylosoxidans and P. aeruginosa biofilms. METHODS: Biofilms of A. xylosoxidans and P. aeruginosa used as a comparative control were formed by incubating the bacteria on contact lens cases and on coverslips in phosphate-buffered saline. The biofilms were then exposed to PAPB and BAK for 5 minutes and 4 hours. After exposure, alginate swabs were used to remove the biofilms from the lens cases and the bacteria were plated on tryptic soy agar for determination of survivors. Also, after exposure to these disinfectants, the A. xylosoxidans and P. aeruginosa biofilms were stained with SYTO 9 and propidium iodide. Using a confocal microscope with a 488-nm laser, the number of cells with damaged cell membranes was determined. RESULTS: After 5 minutes of exposure to BAK or PAPB, A. xylosoxidans biofilms were more resistant to the antimicrobial effects of these disinfectants than P. aeruginosa biofilms. After 4 hours, both organisms were reduced by more than 3 logs after exposure to either BAK or PAPB. Confocal microscopy studies revealed that BAK was more effective at damaging A. xylosoxidans and P. aeruginosa cell membranes than PAPB at the concentrations used in ophthalmic products. CONCLUSIONS: Biofilms of the emerging pathogen A. xylosoxidans were more resistant to the disinfectants PAPB and BAK than biofilms of P. aeruginosa. Because of the emergence of A. xylosoxidans and the demonstrated greater resistance to the common ophthalmic preservatives BAK and PAPB than the standard Gram-negative organism P. aeruginosa, A. xylosoxidans biofilms should be assessed in antimicrobial challenge tests to assure the safety of multiuse ophthalmic products.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.340

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.013
GPT teacher head0.345
Teacher spread0.331 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it