Mandrekar, Jayawant N.

ABSTRACT Contezolid has activity against methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA), a common cause of orthopedic infection. In a rat model of foreign body osteomyelitis, 1.3 log 10 cfu/g bone and 0.5 log 10 cfu/k-wire reduction in MRSA was found in tibiae ( P = 0.0186) and K-wires, respectively, of contezolid-treated compared to untreated rats. No MRSA was recovered from animals receiving rifampin alone or in combination with contezolid or vancomycin. There was no emergence of resistance to contezolid, vancomycin, or rifampin.

ABSTRACT Wound infections, exacerbated by the prevalence of antibiotic-resistant bacterial pathogens, necessitate innovative antimicrobial approaches. Polymicrobial infections, often involving Pseudomonas aeruginosa and methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA), present challenges due to biofilm formation and antibiotic resistance. Hypochlorous acid (HOCl), a potent antimicrobial agent, holds promise as an alternative therapy. An electrochemical bandage (e-bandage) that generates HOCl in situ via precise polarization controlled by a miniaturized potentiostat was evaluated for the treatment of murine wound biofilm infections containing both P. aeruginosa with “difficult-to-treat” resistance and MRSA. Previously, HOCl-producing e-bandage was shown to reduce murine wound biofilms containing P. aeruginosa alone. Here, in 5-mm excisional skin wounds containing 48-h biofilms comprising MRSA and P. aeruginosa combined, polarized e-bandage treatment reduced MRSA by 1.1 log 10 CFU/g ( P = 0.026) vs non-polarized e-bandage treatment (no HOCl production), and 1.4 log 10 CFU/g (0.0015) vs Tegaderm only controls; P. aeruginosa was similarly reduced by 1.6 log 10 CFU/g ( P = 0.0032) and 1.6 log 10 CFU/g ( P = 0.0015), respectively. For wounds infected with MRSA alone, polarized e-bandage treatment reduced bacterial load by 1.1 log 10 CFU/g ( P = 0.0048) and 1.3 log 10 CFU/g ( P = 0.0048) compared with non-polarized e-bandage and Tegaderm only, respectively. The e-bandage treatment did not negatively impact wound healing or cause tissue toxicity. The addition of systemic antibiotics did not enhance the antimicrobial efficacy of e-bandages. This study provides additional evidence for the HOCl-producing e-bandage as a novel antimicrobial strategy for managing wound infections, including in the context of antibiotic resistance and polymicrobial infections. IMPORTANCE New approaches are needed to combat the rise of antimicrobial-resistant infections. The HOCl-producing electrochemical bandage (e-bandage) leverages in situ generation of HOCl, a natural biocide, for broad-spectrum killing of wound pathogens. Unlike traditional therapies that may exhibit limited activity against biofilms and antimicrobial-resistant organisms, the e-bandage offers a potent, standalone solution that does not contribute to further resistance or require adjunctive antibiotic therapy. Here, we show the ability of the e-bandage to address polymicrobial infection by antimicrobial resistant clinical isolates of Staphylococcus aureus and Pseudomonas aeruginosa , two commonly isolated, co-infecting wound pathogens. Effectiveness of the HOCl-producing e-bandage in reducing pathogen load while minimizing tissue toxicity and avoiding the need for systemic antibiotics underscores its potential as a tool in managing complex wound infections.

ABSTRACT The growing threat of antibiotic-resistant bacterial pathogens necessitates the development of alternative antimicrobial approaches. This is particularly true for chronic wound infections, which commonly harbor biofilm-dwelling bacteria. A novel electrochemical bandage (e-bandage) delivering low-levels of hypochlorous acid (HOCl) was evaluated against Pseudomonas aeruginosa murine wound biofilms. 5 mm skin wounds were created on the dorsum of mice and infected with 10 6 colony-forming units (CFU) of P. aeruginosa . Biofilms were formed over 2 days, after which e-bandages were placed on the wound beds and covered with Tegaderm. Mice were administered Tegaderm-only (control), non-polarized e-bandage (no HOCl production), or polarized e-bandage (using an HOCl-producing potentiostat), with or without systemic amikacin. Purulence and wound areas were measured before and after treatment. After 48 hours, wounds were harvested for bacterial quantification. Forty-eight hours of polarized e-bandage treatment resulted in mean biofilm reductions of 1.4 log 10 CFUs/g ( P = 0.0107) vs non-polarized controls and 2.2 log 10 CFU/g ( P = 0.004) vs Tegaderm-only controls. Amikacin improved CFU reduction in Tegaderm-only ( P = 0.0045) and non-polarized control groups ( P = 0.0312) but not in the polarized group ( P = 0.3876). Compared to the Tegaderm-only group, there was less purulence in the polarized group ( P = 0.009). Wound closure was neither impeded nor improved by either polarized or non-polarized e-bandage treatment. Concurrent amikacin did not impact wound closure or purulence. In conclusion, an HOCl-producing e-bandage reduced P. aeruginosa in wound biofilms with no impairment in wound healing, representing a promising antibiotic-free approach for addressing wound infection.