Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Protease-Sensitive Inhibitory Activity of Cell-free Supernatant of Lactobacillus crispatus 156 Synergizes with Ciprofloxacin, Moxifloxacin and Streptomycin Against Pseudomonas aeruginosa: An In Vitro Study

  • Published:
Probiotics and Antimicrobial Proteins Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Ciprofloxacin and streptomycin are frequently prescribed for the treatment of medical conditions originating due to infection by Pseudomonas aeruginosa. However, fluoroquinolone administration has been linked to the outgrowth of Clostridium difficile pathogen, especially in immunocompromised patients. Secondly, frequent administration of antibiotics may lead to development of resistance in the pathogens. Thus, there is a need to explore innovative adjunct therapies to lower the therapeutic doses of the antibiotics. Herein, we evaluated the synergism, if any, between conventional antibiotics and the cell-free supernatant (CFS) of vaginal Lactobacillus crispatus 156 against P. aeruginosa MTCC 741. L. crispatus 156 was isolated from the human vaginal tract, and its CFS had broad-spectrum antimicrobial activity against various Gram-positive and Gram-negative pathogens, including P. aeruginosa. The inhibitory substance present in the CFS completely lost its activity after treatment with proteinases and was resistant to temperatures up to 80 °C and pH ranging from 2 to 6. The cumulative production of the inhibitory substance in CFS was studied, and it showed that the secretion of the inhibitory substance was initiated in middle log phase of growth and peaked in late log phase. Further, CFS synergized the activities of ciprofloxacin, moxifloxacin, and streptomycin as evaluated in terms of checkerboard titrations. It lowered the minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) of ciprofloxacin by almost 30 times and MIC of both moxifloxacin and streptomycin by 8 times. Interestingly, pepsin treatment of CFS caused the complete abrogation of its synergistic effect with all the three antibiotics. Thus, from the study, it can be concluded that probiotic-based alternative therapeutic regimen can be designed for the treatment of P. aeruginosa infections.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. National Nosocomial Infections Surveillance system report (1999) Data summary from January 1990–May 1999. Am J Infect Control 2:520–532

    Google Scholar 

  2. Goossens H (2003) Susceptibility of multi-drug-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa in intensive care units: results from the European MYSTIC study group. Clin Microbiol Infect 9:980–983

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Poole K (2004) Efflux-mediated multi resistance in Gram-negative bacteria. Clin Microbiol Infect 10:12–26

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. National Nosocomial Infections Surveillance system report (2004) Data summary from January 1992 through June 2004. Am J Infect Control 32:470–485

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Pépin J, Saheb N, Coulombe M, Alary M, Corriveau M, Authier S et al (2005) Emergence of fluoroquinolones as the predominant risk factor for Clostridium difficile–associated diarrhea: a cohort study during an epidemic in Quebec. Clin Infect Dis 41:1254–1260

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Morita Y, Tomida J, Kawamura Y (2014) Responses of Pseudomonas aeruginosa to antimicrobials. Front Microbiol. doi:10.3389/fmicb.2013.00422

    Google Scholar 

  7. Forestier C, Guelon D, Cluytens V, Gillart T, Sirot J, de Champs C (2008) Oral probiotic and prevention of Pseudomonas aeruginosa infections: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled pilot study in ICU-patients. Crit Care 12:R69. doi:10.1186/cc6907

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Stapleton AE, Au-Yeung M, Hooton TM, Fredericks DN, Roberts PL, Czaja CA et al (2011) Randomized, placebo-controlled phase 2 clinical trial of a Lactobacillus crispatus probiotic given intravaginally for prevention of recurrent urinary tract infection. Clin Infect Dis 52:1212–1217

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Pavlova SI, Kilic AO, Kilic SS, So JS, Nader-Macias ME, Simoes JA et al (2002) Genetic diversity of vaginal lactobacilli from women in different countries based on 16S rRNA gene sequences. J Appl Microbiol 92:451–459

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Lakshminarayanan B, Guinane CM, O’Connor PM, Coakley M, Hill C, Stanton C et al (2013) Isolation and characterization of bacteriocin-producing bacteria from the intestinal microbiota of elderly Irish subjects. J Appl Microbiol 114:886–898

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Kim J, Rajagopal SN (2001) Antibacterial activities of Lactobacillus crispatus ATCC 33820 and Lactobacillus gasseri ATCC 33323. J Microbiol 39:146–148

    Google Scholar 

  12. Tahara T, Kanatani K (1997) Isolation and partial characterisation of crispacin, a cell-associated bacteriocin produced by Lactobacillus crispatus JCM 2009. FEMS Microbiol Lett 147:287–290

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. de Man JC, Rogosa M, Sharpe ME (1960) A medium for the cultivation of lactobacilli. J Appl Bacteriol 23:130–135

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Holt JG, Krieg NR, Sneath PH, Staley JT, Williams ST (1994) Bergeys manual of determinative bacteriology, 9th edn. Lippincott Williams and Wilkins, Baltimore

    Google Scholar 

  15. Moore E, Arnscheidt A, Kuger A, Strompl C, Mau M (2004) Simplified protocols for the preparation of genomic DNA from bacterial cultures. In: Kowalchuk GA, de Bruijn FJ, Head IM, Van der Zijpp AJ, van Elsas JD (eds) Molecular microbial ecology manual, 2nd edn. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Netherland, pp 3–18

    Google Scholar 

  16. Altschul SF, Gish W, Miller W, Myers EW, Lipman DJ (1990) Basic local alignment search tool. J Mol Biol 215:403–410

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Geis A, Singh J, Teuber M (1983) Potential of lactic streptococci to produce bacteriocin. Appl Environ Microbiol 45:205–211

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Melancon D, Grenier D (2003) Production and properties of bacteriocin-like inhibitory substances from the swine pathogens Streptococcus suis serotype 2. Appl Environ Microbiol 69:4482–4488

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Bauer AW, Kirby MM, Sherris JC, Turck M (1966) Antibiotic susceptibility testing by a standardized single disk method. Am J Clin Pathol 45:493–496

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. National Committee for clinical laboratory standards (2000) Performance standards for antimicrobial disk susceptibility tests, 7th edn. Approved standard M2-A7. NCCLS, Wayne

    Google Scholar 

  21. Ruíz FO, Gerbaldo G, García MJ, Giordano W, Pascual L, Barberis IL (2012) Synergistic effect between two bacteriocin-like inhibitory substances produced by lactobacilli strains with inhibitory activity for Streptococcus agalactiae. Curr Microbiol 64:349–356

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Petersen P, Labthavikul P, Jones C, Bradford P (2006) In vitro antibacterial activities of tigecycline in combination with other antimicrobial agents determined by chequerboard and time-kill kinetic analysis. J Antimicrob Chemother 57:573–576

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Dicks LMT, Heunis TDJ, Staden DAV, Brand A, Noll KS, Chikindas ML (2011) Medical and personal care applications of bacteriocins produced by Lactic acid bacteria. In: Drider D, Rebuffat S (eds) Prokaryotic antimicrobial peptides: from genes to applications. Springer, New York, pp 391–421

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  24. Cotter PD, Ross RP, Hill C (2013) Bacteriocins—a viable alternative to antibiotics? Nat Rev Microbiol 11:95–105

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Dobson A, Cotter R, Ross P, Hill C (2012) Bacteriocin production: a probiotic trait? Appl Environ Microbiol 78:1–6. doi:10.1128/AEM.05576-11

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Al-Mathkhury HJF, Ali AS, Ghafil JA (2011) Antagonistic effect of bacteriocin against urinary catheter associated Pseudomonas aeruginosa biofilm. N Am J Med Sci 3(8):367–370. doi:10.4297/najms.2011.3367

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Majhenic AC, Matijasic BB, Rogelj I (2003) Chromosomal location of the genetic determinants for bacteriocins produced by Lactobacillus gasseri K7. J Dairy Res 70:199–203. doi:10.1017/S0022029903006162

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Stover CK, Pham XQ, Erwin AL et al (2000) Complete genome sequence of Pseudomonas aeruginosa PAO1, an opportunistic pathogen. Nature 406:959–964

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Gálvez A, Abriouel H, López RL, Omar NB (2007) Bacteriocin-based strategies for food biopreservation. Int J Food Microbiol 120:51–70

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Rishi P, Preet S, Kaur P (2011) Effect of L. plantarum cell-free extract and co-trimoxazole against Salmonella typhimurium: a possible adjunct therapy. Ann Clin Microbiol Antimicrob 10:9. doi:10.1186/1476-0711-10-9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Giacometti A, Cirioni O, Barcheisi M, Fortuna M, Scarleise E (1999) In vitro activity of cationic peptides alone and in combination with clinically used antimicrobial agents against Pseudomonas aeruginosa. J Antimicrob Chemother 44:641–645

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Mataraci E, Dosler S (2012) In vitro activities of antibiotics and antimicrobial cationic peptides alone and in combination against methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus biofilms. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 56:6366–6371

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  33. Draper LA, Cotter PD, Hill C, Ross RP (2013) The two peptide lantibiotic lacticin 3147 acts synergistically with polymyxin to inhibit Gram negative bacteria. BMC Microbiol 13:212. doi:10.1186/1471-2180-13-212

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Drlica K, Zhao XK (1997) DNA gyrase, topoisomerase IV, and the 4-quinolones. Microbiol Mol Biol Rev 61:377–392

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  35. Hancock RE (1997) Peptide antibiotics. Lancet 349:418–422

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This work was funded by a research grant to Dr. Sukhraj Kaur by the University Grants Commission (UGC; Vide F.No. 42-478/2013 (SR), dated: 22/03/2013), New Delhi, India. Ms. Preeti Sharma is grateful to UGC for the award of Junior Research Fellowship under the scheme University of Potential for Excellence, granted to Guru Nanak Dev University, Amritsar, India.

Conflict of Interest

Sukhraj Kaur and Preeti Sharma declares that they have no conflict of interest.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Microbiology, Guru Nanak Dev University, Amritsar, 143005, India

    Sukhraj Kaur & Preeti Sharma

Authors
  1. Sukhraj Kaur
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Preeti Sharma
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sukhraj Kaur.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Kaur, S., Sharma, P. Protease-Sensitive Inhibitory Activity of Cell-free Supernatant of Lactobacillus crispatus 156 Synergizes with Ciprofloxacin, Moxifloxacin and Streptomycin Against Pseudomonas aeruginosa: An In Vitro Study. Probiotics & Antimicro. Prot. 7, 172–180 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12602-015-9188-4

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12602-015-9188-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation