大黄素对多重耐药金黄色葡萄球菌的抑菌作用及其机制

Abstract
Figure/Table
References
Related Citation (15)

Download: PDF (1522 KB) HTML (1 KB)
Export: BibTeX | EndNote (RIS)

Abstract Objective To explore antibacterial effect of emodin on multi-resistant staphylococcus aureus (staphylococcus multidrug-resistant) and its mechanism. Methods The drug resistance of clinically isolated methicillin-resistant staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) was determined by full-automatic microbial identification and drug sensitivity analyzer. The minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC), minimum bactericidal concentration (MBC) and the half inhibitory concentration (IC₅₀) of emodin in MRSA standard strains and clinically isolated strains were detected by double dilution method. With MRSA standard strains as the research background, they were divided into control group, emodin (1×MIC) group and emodin (2×MIC) group. The number of bacteria in MRSA standard strains was observed during a period of time (0, 0.5, 1, 2, 4, 8, 16 h). The permeability of cell membrane was observed by double-color fluorescent staining. The levels of biofilm-related genes were detected by real-time quantitative PCR (RT-PCR). The models of mice with MRSA infection were prepared, and they were divided into infection group, emodin (2.5 mg/kg) group, emodin (5 mg/kg) group and emodin (10 mg/kg) group. The mice models without infection treatment were enrolled as control group. At 1h after infection, mice in all emodin groups were given corresponding doses of emodin. At 12h after administration, bacteria content in blood, inflammatory factors and phagocytic function of peritoneal macrophages were compared. Results The results of drug-resistant bacteria confirmed that the 4 clinically isolated strains were MRSA. MIC, MBC and IC₅₀ of emodin for standard and clinically isolated MRSA strains were (4, 8 , 8, 8, 2 μg/ml),(8, 16, 8, 8, 4 μg/ml) and (2.51, 4.15, 5.36, 4.01, 1.43 μg/ml), respectively. The number of standard MRSA strains, expressions of cidA, icaA, agrA, sortaseA and sarA in emodin (1×MIC) group and emodin (2×MIC) group were lower than those in control group (P<0.05), and there was red fluorescence in fluorescence images. The levels of drug-resistant bacteria in blood, serum tumor necrosis factor (TNF-α), interleukin-1β (IL-1β), interleukin-8 (IL-8), interferon gamma (INF-γ) and procalcitonin (PCT) in emodin (2.5 mg/kg) group, emodin (5 mg/kg) group and emodin (10 mg/kg) group were lower than those in infection group (P<0.05), phagocytic rate and index of peritoneal macrophages were higher than those in infection group (P<0.05). Conclusions Emodin can improve the permeability of cell membrane, regulate the expression of biofilm-related genes, reduce inflammation level and recover the phagocytic function of macrophages.

Key words： multi-resistant staphylococcus aureus emodin antibacterial effect cell permeability inflammation response action mechanism

Received: 26 July 2024

ZTFLH:

R378.1

	Service

	E-mail this article
	Add to my bookshelf
	Add to citation manager
	E-mail Alert
	RSS
	Articles by authors
	ZHU Kunpeng
	HUANG Shiqi
	HAN Yizhen

Cite this article:

ZHU Kunpeng,HUANG Shiqi,HAN Yizhen. Antibacterial effect of emodin on multi-resistant staphylococcus aureus and its mechanism[J]. Med. J. Chin. Peop. Armed Poli. Forc., 2025, 36(1): 1-6.

URL:

https://journal08.magtechjournal.com/Jwk_wjyx/EN/ OR https://journal08.magtechjournal.com/Jwk_wjyx/EN/Y2025/V36/I1/1

[1]	石迎迎,潘芬,杜青青,等. 金黄色葡萄球菌致儿童皮肤软组织感染90例病原菌耐药性和分子分型[J]. 中国感染与化疗杂志,2022,22(5):589-596.
[2]	方咏梅,章燕,徐雪莹,等. 金黄色葡萄球菌耐药性与耐药基因和毒力基因的相关性[J]. 检验医学,2023,38(4):357-361.
[3]	段德令,罗爱武,龚娅,等. 1298例耐甲氧西林金黄色葡萄球菌医院感染分布情况及易感因素分析[J]. 海军医学杂志,2023,44(8):850-853.
[4]	孙建林,张阳,张宇鹏,等. 内蒙古地区皮肤化脓性感染部位分离的金黄色葡萄球菌耐药及毒力特征研究[J]. 中华皮肤科杂志,2022,55(3):200-207.
[5]	马海会,邢嘉倩,吴永娜,等. 连翘绿茶不同加工阶段提取物的抑菌及抗氧化活性分析[J]. 山西农业科学,2023,51(11):1339-1346.
[6]	李志君,崔生玲,张雯,等. 苦豆子提取物对多重耐药大肠杆菌的体外抑菌作用[J]. 中国兽药杂志,2022,56(11):10-16.
[7]	Dukanovic S, Ganic T, Loncarevic B, et al. Elucidating the antibiofilm activity of Frangula emodin against Staphylococcus aureus biofilms[J]. J Appl Microbiol, 2022, 132(3):1840-1855.
[8]	Livak K J, Schmittgen T D. Analysis of relative gene expression data using real-time quantitative PCR and the 2(-Delta Delta C(T)) method[J]. Methods, 2001, 25:402-408.
[9]	刘瑜,王城,周柯均,等. 儿童急性化脓性阑尾炎术后切口感染及治疗效果分析[J]. 中国病原生物学杂志,2023,18(3):323-326,331.
[10]	Huang J, Fan Q, Guo M, et al. Octenidine dihydrochloride treatment of a meticillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus biofilm-infected mouse wound[J]. J Wound Care, 2021, 30(2):106-114.
[11]	Yang W T, Ke CY, Wu W T, et al. Antimicrobial and anti-inflammatory potential of Angelica dahurica and Rheum officinale extract accelerates wound healing in Staphylococcus aureus-infected wounds[J]. Sci Rep, 2020, 10(1):5596-5605.
[12]	雷湘,陈科力,杨占秋,等. 大黄素配伍对柯萨奇病毒B3感染小鼠的病毒抑制作用研究[J]. 中药药理与临床,2019,35(1):121-126.
[13]	孙蒋,罗静雯,姚文杰,等. 大黄素对急性肾损伤大鼠肠道菌群的调节作用[J]. 中国中药杂志,2019,44(4):758-764.
[14]	Dietrich M, Besser M, Debus E S, et al. Human skin biofilm model: translational impact on swabbing and debridement[J]. J Wound Care, 2023, 32(7):446-455.
[15]	孙生,朱维芳,王爱利,等. 利奈唑胺联合万古霉素对耐甲氧西林金黄色葡萄球菌生物被膜的干预作用[J]. 中华医院感染学杂志,2022,32(22):3370-3374.
[16]	邓欣,王佳琳,晏嘉,等. 导管相关血流感染金黄色葡萄球菌耐药性及其生物膜形成机制[J]. 中华医院感染学杂志,2024,34(6):826-831.
[17]	Jin Y, Guo Y, Zhan Q, et al. Subinhibitory concentrations of mupirocin stimulate staphylococcus aureus biofilm formation by upregulating cidA[J]. Antimicrob Agents Chemother, 2020, 64(3):e01912-19.
[18]	Bai X, Shen Y, Zhang T, et al. Anti-biofilm activity of biochanin A against Staphylococcus aureus[J]. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol, 2023, 107(2-3):867-879.
[19]	Aubourg M, Pottier M, Léon A, et al. Inactivation of the response regulator agra has a pleiotropic effect on biofilm formation, pathogenesis and stress response in staphylococcus lugdunensis[J]. Microbiol Spectr, 2022, 10(1):e0159821-e0159836.
[20]	Englerová K, Bedlovicová Z, Nemcová R, et al. Bacillus amyloliquefaciens-derived lipopeptide biosurfactants inhibit biofilm formation and expression of biofilm-related genes of staphylococcus aureus[J]. Antibiotics (Basel), 2021, 10(10):1252-1269.
[21]	Vijayakumar K, Muhilvannan S, Arun Vignesh M. Hesperidin inhibits biofilm formation, virulence and staphyloxanthin synthesis in methicillin resistant Staphylococcus aureus by targeting SarA and CrtM: an in vitro and in silico approach[J]. World J Microbiol Biotechnol, 2022, 38(3):44.
[22]	Dutta P, Bishayi B. Neutralization of TNF-α and IL-1β regulates CXCL8 production through CXCL8/CXCR1 axis in macrophages during staphylococcus aureus infection[J]. Immunol Invest, 2021, 50(6):700-725.
[23]	Lin Z Q, Lin G Y, He W W, et al. IL-6 and INF-γ levels in patients with brucellosis in severe epidemic region, Xinjiang, China[J]. Infect Dis Poverty, 2020, 9(1):47-52.