Background: Topical surfactant therapy has been found to be effective in the management of recalcitrant chronic rhinosinusitis. Objective: To determine in vitro the antibacterial potential of SinuSurf™, a previously commercially available sinonasal surfactant. Methods: Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) and Pseudomonas aeruginosa (PA) cultures were grown in the presence or absence of serial dilutions of mupirocin or gentamicin with and without SinuSurf and quantified by colony-forming units (CFUs). Biofilm formation was also assessed. Finally, bacterial growth was evaluated in sinus irrigation bottles inoculated with MRSA or PA and rinsed daily with SinuSurf. Results: SinuSurf alone evinced a 3-log (1,000-fold) and 6-log (106-fold) reduction in CFUs for MRSA and PA, respectively. The combination of SinuSurf with a 1:10 dilution mupirocin and 1:100 dilution gentamicin demonstrated complete bacterial eradication. Similar concentrations of antibiotic dilutions alone demonstrated bacterial growth. SinuSurf averaged an 83% MRSA and 76% PA reduction in biofilm formation. Bottle contamination evaluation demonstrated reduction of MRSA and PA (p < 0.05) with SinuSurf. Conclusion: Biofilms have been demonstrated in chronic rhinosinusitis patients and implicated in recalcitrant disease. Our in vitro data demonstrates the addition of SinuSurf improved the effectiveness of a lower concentration of topical antibiotics in biofilm mass and viability.

Keywords:
Sinusitis, Biofilm, Mupirocin, Gentamicin, Irrigations, Surfactants, Staphylococcus, Pseudomonas
1.
Chiu AG, Palmer JN, Woodworth BA, Doghramji L, Cohen MB, Prince A, et al: Baby shampoo nasal irrigations for the symptomatic post-functional endoscopic sinus surgery patient. Am J Rhinol 2008;22:34–37.
2.
Tamashiro E, Banks CA, Chen B, Gudis DA, Dogrhamji L, Myntti M, et al: In vivo effects of citric acid/zwitterionic surfactant cleansing solution on rabbit sinus mucosa. Am J Rhinol Allergy 2009;23:597–601.
3.
Le T, Psaltis A, Tan LW, Wormald PJ: The efficacy of topical antibiofilm agents in a sheep model of rhinosinusitis. Am J Rhinol 2008;22:560–567.
4.
Van Hamme JD, Singh A, Ward OP: Physiological aspects. Part 1 in a series of papers devoted to surfactants in microbiology and biotechnology. Biotechnol Adv 2006;24:604–620.
5.
Antunes MB, Feldman MD, Cohen NA, Chiu AG: Dose-dependent effects of topical tobramycin in an animal model of Pseudomonas sinusitis. Am J Rhinol 2007;21:423–427.
6.
Ha KR, Psaltis AJ, Butcher AR, Wormald PJ, Tan LW: In vitro activity of mupirocin on clinical isolates of Staphylococcus aureus and its potential implications in chronic rhinosinusitis. Laryngoscope 2008;118:535–540.
7.
Whatley WS, Chandra RK, MacDonald CB: Systemic absorption of gentamicin nasal irrigations. Am J Rhinol 2006;20:251–254.
8.
Solares CA, Batra PS, Hall GS, Citardi MJ: Treatment of chronic rhinosinusitis exacerbations due to methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus with mupirocin irrigations. Am J Otolaryngol 2006;27:161–165.
9.
Khalid AN, Quraishi SA, Kennedy DW: Long-term quality of life measures after functional endoscopic sinus surgery. Am J Rhinol 2004;18:131–136.
10.
Zhang Z, Kofonow JM, Finkelman BS, Doghramji L, Chiu AG, Kennedy DW, et al: Clinical factors associated with bacterial biofilm formation in chronic rhinosinusitis. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2011;144:457–462.
11.
Bendouah Z, Barbeau J, Hamad WA, Desrosiers M: Biofilm formation by Staphylococcus aureus and Pseudomonas aeruginosa is associated with an unfavorable evolution after surgery for chronic sinusitis and nasal polyposis. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2006;134:991–996.
12.
Psaltis AJ, Ha KR, Beule AG, Tan LW, Wormald PJ: Confocal scanning laser microscopy evidence of biofilms in patients with chronic rhinosinusitis. Laryngoscope 2007;117:1302–1306.
13.
Foreman A, Wormald PJ: Different biofilms, different disease? A clinical outcomes study. Laryngoscope 2010;120:1701–1706.
14.
Ferguson BJ, Stolz DB: Demonstration of biofilm in human bacterial chronic rhinosinusitis. Am J Rhinol 2005;19:452–457.
15.
Ha KR, Psaltis AJ, Tan L, Wormald PJ: A sheep model for the study of biofilms in rhinosinusitis. Am J Rhinol 2007;21:339–345.
16.
Ramadan HH, Sanclement JA, Thomas JG: Chronic rhinosinusitis and biofilms. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2005;132:414–417.
17.
Sanclement JA, Webster P, Thomas J, Ramadan HH: Bacterial biofilms in surgical specimens of patients with chronic rhinosinusitis. Laryngoscope 2005;115:578–582.
18.
Sanderson AR, Leid JG, Hunsaker D: Bacterial biofilms on the sinus mucosa of human subjects with chronic rhinosinusitis. Laryngoscope 2006;116:1121–1126.
19.
Desrosiers M, Myntti M, James G: Methods for removing bacterial biofilms: in vitro study using clinical chronic rhinosinusitis specimens. Am J Rhinol 2007;21:527–532.
20.
Singh A, Van Hamme JD, Ward OP: Surfactants in microbiology and biotechnology. 2. Application aspects. Biotechnol Adv 2007;25:99–121.
21.
NeilMed: SinuSurf http://www.neilmed.com/usa/ssinfo.php (accessed March 28, 2012).
22.
Hekiert AM, Kofonow JM, Doghramji L, Kennedy DW, Chiu AG, Palmer JN, et al: Biofilms correlate with Th1 inflammation in the sinonasal tissue of patients with chronic rhinosinusitis. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2009;141:448–453.
23.
Keen M, Foreman A, Wormald PJ: The clinical significance of nasal irrigation bottle contamination. Laryngoscope 2010;120:2110–2114.
24.
Lee JM, Nayak JV, Doghramji LL, Welch KC, Chiu AG: Assessing the risk of irrigation bottle and fluid contamination after endoscopic sinus surgery. Am J Rhinol Allergy 2010;24:197–199.
25.
Welch KC, Cohen MB, Doghramji LL, Cohen NA, Chandra RK, Palmer JN, et al: Clinical correlation between irrigation bottle contamination and clinical outcomes in post-functional endoscopic sinus surgery patients. Am J Rhinol Allergy 2009;23:401–404.
© 2012 S. Karger AG, Basel
2012
Copyright / Drug Dosage / Disclaimer
Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.
You do not currently have access to this content.