Antibacterial Efficacy of Chitosan against Staphylococcus intermedius in Dogs

개의 표재성 농피증에서 분리된 Staphylococcus intermedius에 대한 키토산의 항균효과

  • Jeong, Hyo-Hoon (College of Veterinary Medicine, Kyungpook National University) ;
  • Lee, Keun-Woo (College of Veterinary Medicine, Kyungpook National University) ;
  • Oh, Tae-Ho (College of Veterinary Medicine, Kyungpook National University)
  • 정효훈 (경북대학교 수의과대학 수의내과학교실) ;
  • 이근우 (경북대학교 수의과대학 수의내과학교실) ;
  • 오태호 (경북대학교 수의과대학 수의내과학교실)
  • Published : 2007.06.30

Abstract

The antibacterial efficacy of 0.1% (w/v) chitosan solution against Staphylococcus intermedius isolated from a dog with superficial pyoderma was evaluated in vitro and in vivo. The exposure time for the 0.1% chitosan solutions at different pH to be able to eliminate the bacterial cells and the effect of pH of the solutions on antibacterial activity was tested at the same time in vitro. The antibacterial activity of chitosan was compared to other antibacterial agents including 2.5% benzoyl peroxide, 0.5% chlorhexidine acetate, 0.1% chitosan solution combined with 2.5% benzoyl peroxide and chitosan combined with 0.5% chlorhexidine using a modified detergent scrub quantitative technique in 10 adult mongrel dogs in vivo. They were able to eliminate a number of bacteria after the exposure time of 10 minutes at varying degrees according to the pH of the solutions. The antibacterial activity of chitosan was inversely affected by pH with higher activity at lower pH value. The 0.1% chitosan solution was also efficacious against Staphylococcus intermedius in vivo. The combinations of chitosan with benzoyl peroxide and with chlorhexidine were shown to exert higher activity when compared to those of chitosan alone and benzoyl peroxide or chlorhexidine alone. The 0.1% chitosan solution was considered to be efficacious against Staphylococcus intermedius isolated from a dog with superficial pyoderma in both in vivo and in vitro and have a potential for the clinical applications in the treatment or pyoderma in dogs.

개의 표재성 농피증으로부터 분리된 Staphylococcus intermedius에 대한 0.1%(w/v) 키토산의 항균효과를 조사하였다. In vitro에서 0.1% 키토산이 S. intermedius에 대한 항균효과를 나타내기 위한 접촉시간과 키토산 용액의 pH가 미치는 영향을 조사하였다. In vivo에서 10두의 개의 피부에 인공적으로 S. intermedius를 접종하여 0.1% 키토산, 2.5% benzoyl peroxide, 0.5% chlorhexidine, 키토산-benzoyl peroxide 혼합용액, 키토산-chlorhexidine 혼합용액의 항균효과를 modified detergent cup scrub technique을 이용하여 비교하였다. In vitro에서 접종액의 내의 세균수는 $6.08{\pm}0.20CFU/ml$ 이었으며 pH 4.5 용액의 경우 10분, 30분, 120분의 접촉시간 후 각각 $3.57{\pm}0.51,\;2.82{\pm}0.24,\;2.40{\pm}0.17CFU/ml$로 감소하였다. 동일한 각각의 접촉시간후 pH 5.0 용액은 $4.22{\pm}0.08,\;3.44{\pm}0.41,\;3.16{\pm}0.09$, pH 5.5 용액은 $4.75{\pm}0.14,\;4.32{\pm}0.08,\;3.53{\pm}0.33$, pH 5.9 용액은 $5.57{\pm}0.36,\;5.02{\pm}0.42,\;4.87{\pm}0.12CFU/ml$로 감소하였다. 따라서 pH에 따라 정도의 차이는 있었으나 모든 키토산 용액은 10분의 접촉시간후 현저한 항균효과를 나타내었으며 (p<0.05) pH 4.5에서 가장 높게 나타났다. In vivo에서 접종액내의 세균수는 $6.61{\pm}0.30CFU/cm^2$ 이었으며 키토산은 $3.25{\pm}0.98$, benzoyl peroxide는 $0.68{\pm}1.13$, chlorhexidine은 $3.14{\pm}0.55$, 키토산-benzoyl peroxide은 $0.48{\pm}0.56$, 키토산-chlorhexidine은 $2.55{\pm}0.88CFU/ml$로 각각 현저히 감소하였다 (p<0.01). 0.1% 키토산 단독보다는 소량의 benzoyl peroxide 또는 chlorhexidine을 혼합용액의 항균효과가 현저히 증가하였다. 따라서 0.1%키토산은 S. intermedius에 대하여 in vitro 및 in vivo에서 항균효과를 나타내었으며 개의 화농성 농피증의 국소제제로 적용가능성이 있을 것으로 사료된다.

Keywords

References

  1. Amber EI, Wsain SF. An update on common wound antiseptics. Aust Vet Pract 1984; 14: 29-33
  2. Choi BK, Kim KY, Yoo YJ, Oh SJ, Choi JH, Kim CY. In vitro antimicrobial activity of a chitooligosaccharide mixture against Actinobacillus actinomycetemcomitans and Streptococcus mutans. Int J Antimicrob Agents 2001; 18: 553-557 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0924-8579(01)00434-4
  3. Chung YC, Wang HL, Chen YM, Li SL. Effect of abiotic factors on the antibacterial activity of chitosan against waterbome pathogens. Bioresour Technol 2003; 88: 179-184 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0960-8524(03)00002-6
  4. Darmadji P, Izumimoto M. Effect of chitosan in meat preservation. Meat Science 1994; 38: 243-354 https://doi.org/10.1016/0309-1740(94)90114-7
  5. Guaguere E. Topical treatment of canine and feline pyoderma. Vet Dermatol 1996; 7: 145-151 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-3164.1996.tb00239.x
  6. Hill PB, Moriello KA. Canine pyoderma. J Am Vet Med Assoc 1994; 204: 334-340
  7. Holland KT, Keamey JN. Microbiology of Skin. In: Skerrow D, Skerrow CJ (eds.). Methods in Skin Research. pp. 433-474, John Wiley & Sons, Chichester, 1985
  8. Kurita K. Chemistry and application of chitin and chitosan. Polym Degrad Stab 1998; 59: 117-120 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0141-3910(97)00160-2
  9. Kwochika KW, Kowalski JJ. Prophylactic efficacy of four antibacterial shampoos against Staphylococcus intermedius in dogs. Am J Vet Res 1991; 52: 115-118
  10. Lemarie RJ, Hosgood G. Antiseptics and disinfectants in small animal practice. Comp Cont Ed Pract Vet 1995; 17:1339-1351
  11. Lozier SM. Topical wound therapy. In: Hariari 1. (ed). Surgical complications and wound healing in the small animal practice. pp. 63-88, WB Saunders, Philadelphia, 1993
  12. Maibach I. Experimentally-induced infections in the skin of mice. In: Maibach HI, Hildick-Smith G (eds.). Skin bacteria and their role in infections. pp. 85-94, McGraw-Hill Book, New York, 1965
  13. Mathiowitz E. Encyclopedia of controlled drug delivery. pp. 773-774, John Wiley & Sons, New York. 1999
  14. No HK, Park HY, Lee SH, Meyers SP. Antibacterial activity of chitosans and chitosan oligomers with different molecular weights. Int J Food Microbiol 2002; 74: 66-72
  15. Osuna OJ, DeYoung OJ, Walker RL. Comparison of three skin preparation techniques in the dog. Vet Surg 1990; 19: 14-19 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1532-950X.1990.tb01136.x
  16. Papineau AM, Hoover DO, Knorr D, Farkas DF. Antimicrobial effect of water-soluble chitosans with high hydrostatic pressure. Food Biotechnol 1991; 5: 45-57 https://doi.org/10.1080/08905439109549790
  17. Roller S, Covill N. The antifungal properties of chitosan in laboratory media and apple juice. Int J Food Microbial 1999; 47: 67-77 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0168-1605(99)00006-9
  18. Sanchez JR, Nuxbaum KE, Swaim SF, and et al. Chlorhexidine diacetate and povidone iodine cytotoxicity to canine embryonic fibroblasts and Staphylococcus aureus. Vet Surg 1988; 17: 182-185 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1532-950X.1988.tb00995.x
  19. Sanford PA, Hutchings GP. Industrial polysaccharides: Genetic engineering, structure/property relations and application. pp 363-375, Elsevier, Amsterdam, 1987
  20. Scott Ow. Clinical assessment of topical benzoyl peroxide in treatment of canine skin diseases. Vet Med Small Anim Clin 1979; 74: 808-810
  21. Scott DW, Miller WH, Griffin CEo Muller & Kirk' s Small Animal Dennatology. 6th ed. pp. 274-335. WB Saunders, Philadelphia, 200 I
  22. Sebben JE. Surgical antiseptics. J Am Acad Dennatol 1983; 9: 759-765 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0190-9622(83)70192-1
  23. Skjak-Braek G., Anthonsen T, Sandford P. Chitin and chitosan. p 560, Elsevier Applied Science, London, 1989
  24. Sudharshan N., Hoover DG, Knorr D. Antibacterial action of chitosan. Food Biotechnol 1992; 6: 257-272 https://doi.org/10.1080/08905439209549838
  25. Swaim SF, Lee AH. Topical wound medications. J Am Vet Med Assoc 1987; 190: 1588-1593
  26. Thompson WD, Mandy SH. Benzoyl peroxide-a new topical agent for canine dennatology. Vet Med Small Anim Clin 1976; 71: 1059-1062
  27. Tsai GJ, Su WHo Antibacterial activity of shrimp chitosan against Escherichia coli. J Food Prot 1999; 62: 239-243 https://doi.org/10.4315/0362-028X-62.3.239
  28. Tsai GJ, Wu ZY, Su WH. Antibacterial activity of a chitooligosaccharide mixture prepared by cellulose digestion of shrimp chitosan and its application to milk preservation. J Food Prot 2000; 63: 747-752 https://doi.org/10.4315/0362-028X-63.6.747
  29. Wang G Inhibition and inactivation of five species of foodbome pathogens by chitosan. J. Food Prot 1992; 55: 916-919 https://doi.org/10.4315/0362-028X-55.11.916
  30. Yalpani M, Johnson F, Robinson LE. Antimicrobial activity of some chitosan derivatives. In: Brine CJ, Sandford PA, Zikakis JP (eds.). Advances in chitin and chitosan. pp. 543-555, Elsevier Applied Science, London, 1992
  31. Yun YS, Kim KS, Lee YN. Antibacterial and antifungal effect of chitosan. J Chitin Chitosan 1999; 4: 8-14