Hospital-associated infections and related complications are of extreme concern in the healthcare sector since biofilms generated over material surfaces not only create turbulence in the healthcare practices followed but also ruin the device performance, and increased medication, leading to significant chances of drug resistance. Natural rubber latex (NRL) being the first choice for the manufacture of several conventional biomedical devices, it is essential to ensure the surfaces of the same are inherently inactive against most microorganisms. This study presents NRL film surface conjugated with a well-known antibiotic, gentamicin through an amide linkage to generate antibacterial activity to the surface with a significant growth inhibition rate, especially against Staphylococcus aureus. The NRL films were surface-oxidized under controlled acidic conditions to generate carboxyl groups exploring the unsaturation of the base monomer unit. The carboxyl group reacts with the amine groups of gentamicin facilitating its surface conjugation. The surface anchoring was authenticated by FTIR-ATR complimented further by contact angle measurement as a function of hydrophilicity and elemental analysis by EDX spectroscopy. The antibacterial efficacy of modified NRL films was evaluated using antibacterial drop test and the results indicated a substantial growth inhibition rate (>60%) against Pseudomonas aeruginosa and Staphylococcusaureus. The study could be further optimized and proposed as a viable route for the conjugation of active molecules over inert polymer molecules.
FrancoliniIDonelliG.Prevention and control of biofilm-based medical-device-related infections. FEMS Immunol Med Microbiol2010; 59: 227–238.
3.
DonlanRM.Biofilms and device-associated infections. Emerg Infect Dis2001; 7: 277–281.
4.
DarouicheRO.Device-associated infections: A macroproblem that starts with microadherence. Clin Infect Dis2001; 33: 1567–1572.
5.
VickeryKHuHJacombsAS, et al. A review of bacterial biofilms and their role in device-associated infection. Healthc Infect2013; 18: 61–66.
6.
MalheiroJSimõesM. Antimicrobial resistance of biofilms in medical devices. In: Deng Y, Lv W (eds), Biofilms and implantable medical devices. Amsterdam: Elsevier, 2017, pp.97–113.
7.
FloydKAEberlyARHadjifrangiskouM. Adhesion of bacteria to surfaces and biofilm formation on medical devices. In: Deng Y, Lv W (eds), Biofilms and implantable medical devices. Amsterdam: Elsevier, 2017, pp.47–95.
8.
HauserARMecsasJMoirDT.Beyond antibiotics: new therapeutic approaches for bacterial infections. Clin Infect Dis2016; 63: 89–95.
9.
PearceAKO’ReillyRK.Polymers for biomedical applications: the Importance of hydrophobicity in directing biological interactions and application efficacy. Biomacromolecules2021; 22: 4459–4469.
10.
de Las Heras AlarconCPennadamSAlexanderC. Stimuli responsive polymers for biomedical applications. Chem Soc Rev2005; 34: 276–285.
11.
UleryBDNairLSLaurencinCT.Biomedical applications of biodegradable polymers. J Polym Sci B Polym Phys2011; 49: 832–864.
12.
MaitzMF.Applications of synthetic polymers in clinical medicine. Biosurf Biotribol2015; 1: 161–176.
13.
SubramaniamASethuramanS. Biomedical applications of nondegradable polymers. In: Kumbar S, Laurencin C, Deng M (eds) Natural and synthetic biomedical polymers. Amsterdam: Elsevier, 2014, pp.301–308.
14.
JavedFAl-AskarMAlmasK, et al. Tissue reactions to various suture materials used in oral surgical interventions. ISRN Dent2012; 2012: 1–6.
15.
KlingeUKlosterhalfenB.Modified classification of surgical meshes for hernia repair based on the analyses of 1,000 explanted meshes. Hernia2012; 16: 251–258.
16.
ÖzcanMHotzaDFredelMC, et al. Materials and manufacturing techniques for polymeric and ceramic scaffolds used in implant dentistry. J Compos Sci2021; 5: 78.
17.
MoorthiATyanY-CChungT-W.Surface-modified polymers for cardiac tissue engineering. Biomater Sci2017; 5: 1976–1987.
18.
TohHWToongDWYNgJCK, et al. Polymer blends and polymer composites for cardiovascular implants. Eur Polym J2021; 146: 110249.
19.
MituraSSionkowskaAJaiswalA.Biopolymers for hydrogels in cosmetics: review. J Mater Sci Mater Med2020; 31: 50.
20.
PengWPengZTangP, et al. Review of plastic surgery biomaterials and current progress in their 3D manufacturing technology. Materials2020; 13: 4108.
21.
BozukovaDPagnoulleCJérômeR, et al. Polymers in modern ophthalmic implants—Historical background and recent advances. Mater Sci Eng R Rep2010; 69: 63–83.
22.
DobladoLRMartínez-RamosCPradasMM.Biomaterials for neural tissue engineering. Front Nanotechnol2021; 3: 643507.
23.
BoniRAliAShavandiA, et al. Current and novel polymeric biomaterials for neural tissue engineering. J Biomed Sci2018; 25: 90.
24.
YudaevPChuevVKlyukinB, et al. Polymeric dental nanomaterials:antimicrobial action. Polymers2022; 14: 864.
25.
XuXHeLZhuB, et al. Advances in polymeric materials for dental applications. Polym Chem2017; 8: 807–823.
26.
BenčinaMMavričTJunkarI, et al. The importance of antibacterial surfaces in biomedical applications. In: Iglic A, García-Saez A, Rappolt M (eds), Advances in biomembranes and lipid self-assembly. Amsterdam: Elsevier, 2018, pp.115–165.
27.
HasanJCrawfordRJIvanovaEP.Antibacterial surfaces: the quest for a new generation of biomaterials. Trends Biotechnol2013; 31: 295–304.
28.
YuQWuZChenH.Dual-function antibacterial surfaces for biomedical applications. Acta Biomater2015; 16: 1–13.
29.
WuSZuberFBruggerJ, et al. Antibacterial Au nanostructured surfaces. Nanoscale2016; 8: 2620–2625.
30.
RigoSCaiCGunkel-GraboleG, et al. Nanoscience-based strategies to engineer antimicrobial surfaces. Adv Sci2018; 5: 1700892.
31.
AnselmeKDavidsonPPopaAM, et al. The interaction of cells and bacteria with surfaces structured at the nanometre scale. Acta Biomater2010; 6: 3824–3846.
32.
KnetschMLWKooleLH. New Strategies in the development of antimicrobial coatings: the example of increasing usage of silver and silver nanoparticles. Polymers2011; 3: 340–366.
33.
ZhangJZhuWXinB, et al. Development of an antibacterial surface with a self-defensive and pH-responsive function. Biomater Sci2019; 7: 3795–3800.
34.
QiuHSiZLuoY, et al. The mechanisms and the applications of antibacterial polymers in surface modification on medical devices. Front Bioeng Biotechnol2020; 8: 910.
35.
ArakkalARathinamPSirajunnisaP, et al. Antibacterial natural rubber latex films with surface-anchored quaternary poly(4-vinylpyridine) polyelectrolyte. React Funct Polym2022; 172: 105190.
36.
ArakkalAAazemIHoneyG, et al. Antibacterial polyelectrolytic chitosan derivatives conjugated natural rubber latex films with minimized bacterial adhesion. J Appl Polym Sci2021; 138: 49608.
37.
MaanAMCHofmanAHVosWM, et al. Recent developments and practical feasibility of Polymer-Based antifouling coatings. Adv Funct Mater2020; 30: 2000936.
38.
FuYYangYXiaoS, et al. Mixed polymer brushes with integrated antibacterial and antifouling properties. Prog Org Coat2019; 130: 75–82.
39.
ValenciaLKumarSJalvoB, et al. Fully bio-based zwitterionic membranes with superior antifouling and antibacterial properties prepared via surface-initiated free-radical polymerization of poly(cysteine methacrylate). J Mater Chem A2018; 6: 16361–16370.
40.
AbouAitahKBilMPietrzykowskaE, et al. Drug-releasing antibacterial coating made from nano-hydroxyapatite using the sonocoating method. Nanomater2021; 11: 1690.
41.
AyazPXuBZhangX, et al. A pH and hyaluronidase dual-responsive multilayer-based drug delivery system for resisting bacterial infection. Appl Surf Sci2020; 527: 146806.
42.
LiWThianESWangM, et al. Surface Design for antibacterial materials: from fundamentals to Advanced Strategies. Adv Sci2021; 8: e2100368.
43.
RostamiSTekkeşinAIErcanUK, et al. Biomimetic sharkskin surfaces with antibacterial, cytocompatible, and drug delivery properties. Biomater Adv2022; 134: 112565.
44.
DwivediCPandeyHPandeyA, et al. Fabrication and assessment of gentamicin loaded electrospun nanofibrous scaffolds as a quick wound healing dressing material. Curr Nanosci2015; 11: 222–228.
45.
EscobarAMuzzioNEAndreozziP, et al. Antibacterial layer-by-layer films of poly(acrylic acid)–gentamicin complexes with a combined burst and sustainable release of gentamicin. Adv Mater Interfaces2019; 6: 1901373.
46.
LiuYJiPLvH, et al. Gentamicin modified chitosan film with improved antibacterial property and cell biocompatibility. Int J Biol Macromol2017; 98: 550–556.
47.
PhaechamudTIssarayungyuenPPichayakornW.Gentamicin sulfate-loaded porous natural rubber films for wound dressing. Int J Biol Macromol2016; 85: 634–644.
48.
TamVHKabbaraSVoG, et al. Comparative pharmacodynamics of gentamicin against Staphylococcus aureus andPseudomonas aeruginosa. Antimicrob Agents Chemother2006; 50: 2626–2631.
49.
ChimeSAOnyishiIVEzeIO.Application of molecularly structured ben Oil in gentamicin entrapped lipospheres. J Pharm Ther2019; 5: 262–270.
50.
BatulRKhaliqAAlafnanA, et al. Investigation of gentamicin release from polydopamine nanoparticles. Appl Sci2022; 12: 6319.
51.
RafieniaMZarinmehrBPoursamarSA, et al. Coated urinary catheter by PEG/PVA/gentamicin with drug delivery capability against hospital infection. Iran Polym J2013; 22: 75–83.
52.
IsmailAMohamedFRosliL, et al. Spectrophotometric determination of gentamicin loaded PLGA microparticles and method validation via ninhydrin-gentamicin complex as A rapid quantification approach. J Appl Pharm Sci2016; 6: 007–014.
53.
SreejaSParameshwarRVarmaPRH, et al. Hierarchically porous osteoinductive poly(hydroxyethyl methacrylate-co-methyl methacrylate) scaffold with sustained doxorubicin delivery for consolidated osteosarcoma treatment and bone defect repair. ACS Biomater Sci Eng2021; 7: 701–717.
54.
Rapacz-KmitaAStodolak-ZychEZiabkaM, et al. Instrumental characterization of the smectite clay–gentamicin hybrids. Bull Mater Sci2015; 38: 1069–1078.
55.
HeWMosselhyDAZhengY, et al. Effects of silica-gentamicin nanohybrids on osteogenic differentiation of human osteoblast-like SaOS-2 cells. Int J Nanomedicine2018; 13: 877–893.
56.
BatulRBhaveMJ. MahonP, et al. Polydopamine nanosphere with in-situ loaded gentamicin and its antimicrobial activity. Molecules2020; 25: 2090.
57.
KaoienPDechapanyaWKhamwichitA, et al. Natural rubber modification as a pre-vulcanized latex impregnated with TiO2 for photo-catalytic degradation of gaseous benzene. Heliyon2020; 6: e03912.
58.
DannaCSCavalcanteDGSMGomesAS, et al. Silver nanoparticles embedded in natural rubber films: Synthesis, characterization, and evaluation of in vitro toxicity. J Nanomat2016; 2016: 1–10.
59.
KondaveetiSBuenoPVACarmona-RibeiroAM, et al. Microbicidal gentamicin-alginate hydrogels. Carbohydr Polym2018; 186: 159–167.
60.
YasinUQKamarunDSaidCMS, et al. Effect of compounding ingredients and crosslink concentration on blooming rate of natural rubber compounds. Adv Mater Res2015; 1134: 50–55.
61.
CheoSHWangPTanKL, et al. Surface modification of natural rubber latex films via grafting of poly(ethylene glycol) for reduction in protein adsorption and platelet adhesion. J Mater Sci Mater Med2001; 12: 377–384.
62.
SumithaNSSreejaSVarghesePJG, et al. A dual functional superparamagnetic system with pH-dependent drug release and hyperthermia potential for chemotherapeutic applications. Mater Chem Phys2021; 273: 125108.
63.
ChaoY-KLeeC-HLiuK-S, et al. Sustained release of bactericidal concentrations of penicillin in the pleural space via an antibiotic-eluting pigtail catheter coated with electrospun nanofibers: results from in vivo and in vitro studies. Int J Nanomedicine2015; 10: 3329–3336.
64.
Vazquez-RodriguezJAShaqourBGuarch-PérezC, et al. A niclosamide-releasing hot-melt extruded catheter prevents Staphylococcus aureus experimental biomaterial-associated infection. Sci Rep2022; 12: 12329.
65.
Meléndez-OrtizHIAlvarez-LorenzoCBurilloG, et al. Radiation-grafting of N-vinylimidazole onto silicone rubber for antimicrobial properties. Radiat Phys Chem2015; 110: 59–66.
