Sacral neuromodulation device biofilm differs in the absence and presence of infection, harbors antibiotic resistance genes, and is reproducible in vitro

Glenn T. Werneburg,Daniel Hettel,Ava Adler,Sromona D. Mukherjee,Howard B. Goldman,Raymond R. Rackley,Jacqueline Zillioux,Sarah E. Martin,Bradley C. Gill,Daniel A. Shoskes,Aaron W. Miller,Sandip P. Vasavada
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/nau.25511
IF: 2.367
2024-05-30
Neurourology and Urodynamics
Abstract:Introduction/Purpose Sacral neuromodulation (SNM) is effective therapy for overactive bladder refractory to oral therapies, and non‐obstructive urinary retention. A subset of SNM devices is associated with infection requiring surgical removal. We sought to compare microbial compositions of explanted devices in the presence and absence of infection, by testing phase, and other clinical factors, and to investigate antibiotic resistance genes present in the biofilms. We analyzed resistance genes to antibiotics used in commercially‐available anti‐infective device coating/pouch formulations. We further sought to assess biofilm reconstitution by material type and microbial strain in vitro using a continuous‐flow stir tank bioreactor, which mimics human tissue with an indwelling device. We hypothesized that SNM device biofilms would differ in composition by infection status, and genes encoding resistance to rifampin and minocycline would be frequently detected. Materials/Methods Patients scheduled to undergo removal or revision of SNM devices were consented per IRB‐approved protocol (IRB 20‐415). Devices were swabbed intraoperatively upon exposure, with controls and precautions to reduce contamination of the surrounding field. Samples and controls were analyzed with next‐generation sequencing and RT‐PCR, metabolomics, and culture‐based approaches. Associations between microbial diversity or microbial abundance, and clinical variables were then analyzed using t‐tests and ANOVA. Reconstituted biofilm deposition in vitro using the bioreactor was compared by microbial strain and material type using plate‐based assays and scanning electron microscopy. Results Thirty seven devices were analyzed, all of which harbored detectable microbiota. Proteobacteria, Firmicutes and Actinobacteriota were the most common phyla present overall. Beta‐diversity differed in the presence versus absence of infection (p = 0.014). Total abundance, based on normalized microbial counts, differed by testing phase (p
urology & nephrology
What problem does this paper attempt to address?