Year-end Sale % OFF 
Abstract
The antibacterial activity of silver has long been known and has found a variety of applications because its toxicity to human cells is considerably lower than to bacteria. The most widely documented uses are prophylactic treatment of burns and water disinfection. However, the mechanisms by which silver kills cells are not known. Information on resistance mechanisms is apparently contradictory and even the chemistry of Ag+ in such systems is poorly understood. Silver binds to many cellular components, with membrane components probably being more important than nucleic acids. It is difficult to know whether strong binding reflects toxicity or detoxification: some sensitive bacterial strains have been reported as accumulating more silver than the corresponding resistant strain, in others the reverse apparently occurs. In several cases resistance has been shown to be plasmid mediated. The plasmids are reported as difficult to transfer, and can also be difficult to maintain, as we too have found. Attempts to find biochemical differences between resistant and sensitive strains have met with limited success: differences are subtle, such as increased cell surface hydrophobicity in a resistant Escherichia coli. Some of the problems are due to defining conditions in which resistance can be observed. Silver(I) has been shown to bind to components of cell culture media, and the presence of chloride is necessary to demonstrate resistance. The form of silver used must also be considered. This is usually water soluble AgNO3, which readily precipitates as AgCl. The clinically preferred compound is the highly insoluble silver sulfadiazine, which does not cause hypochloraemia in burns. It has been suggested that resistant bacteria are those unable to bind Ag+ more tightly than does chloride. It may be that certain forms of insoluble silver are taken up by cells, as has been found for nickel. Under our experimental conditions, silver complexed by certain ligands is more cytotoxic than AgNO3, yet with related ligands is considerably less toxic. There is evidently a subtle interplay of solubility and stability which should reward further investigation.
Highlights
The antimicrobial activity of silver appears to have been known since early in recorded history
Von Ngeli distinguished between "oligodynamic" death, and "ordinary" poisoning at measurable concentrations. This terminology seems to have contributed to much confused thinking about the means and mechanism(s) by which silver kills bacteria, most of which have been well documented by Romans [6], but the word "oligodynamic" still appears in quite modern textbooks [7]
Further evidence that the silver was the active component came from the observation that sulfadiazine alone was ineffective at concentrations at which AgSu inhibited bacterial growth [31,43]
Summary
The antimicrobial activity of silver appears to have been known since early in recorded history. Further evidence that the silver was the active component came from the observation that sulfadiazine alone was ineffective at concentrations at which AgSu inhibited bacterial growth [31,43]. In his experiments treating Ps. aeruginosa with sublethal concentrations of AgSu, Fox found that less than 0.5% of the silver was in the lipid fraction, up to 3% in the RNA fraction, up to 12% in the DNA fraction and the remainder was bound to the cell "residue" (proteins and polysaccharides) [32].
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
