Bacterial adhesion to biomaterials remains a major problem in the medical devices field. Antimicrobial peptides (AMPs) are well-known components of the innate immune system that can be applied to overcome biofilm-associated infections. Their relevance has been increasing as a practical alternative to conventional antibiotics, which are declining in effectiveness. The recent interest focused on these peptides can be explained by a group of special features, including a wide spectrum of activity, high efficacy at very low concentrations, target specificity, anti-endotoxin activity, synergistic action with classical antibiotics, and low propensity for developing resistance. Therefore, the development of an antimicrobial coating with such properties would be worthwhile. The immobilization of AMPs onto a biomaterial surface has further advantages as it also helps to circumvent AMPs' potential limitations, such as short half-life and cytotoxicity associated with higher concentrations of soluble peptides. The studies discussed in the current review report on the impact of covalent immobilization of AMPs onto surfaces through different chemical coupling strategies, length of spacers, and peptide orientation and concentration. The overall results suggest that immobilized AMPs may be effective in the prevention of biofilm formation by reduction of microorganism survival post-contact with the coated biomaterial. Minimal cytotoxicity and long-term stability profiles were obtained by optimizing immobilization parameters, indicating a promising potential for the use of immobilized AMPs in clinical applications. On the other hand, the effects of tethering on mechanisms of action of AMPs have not yet been fully elucidated. Therefore, further studies are recommended to explore the real potential of immobilized AMPs in health applications as antimicrobial coatings of medical devices.

Bacterial colonization and subsequent biofilm formation is still one of the major problems associated with medical devices. Antimicrobial peptides (AMP) immobilization onto biomaterials surface is a promising strategy to avoid bacterial colonization. However, a correct peptide orientation and exposure from the surface is essential to maintain AMP antimicrobial activity. This work aims to evaluate the effect of the immobilization on antibacterial activity of Dhvar5 (LLLFLLKKRKKRKY), an AMP with a head-to-tail amphipathicity. Dhvar5 was linked to thin chitosan coatings in i) a controlled orientation and exposure, testing covalent immobilization of its N- or C-terminus and using spacers with different lengths and flexibilities or in ii) a random orientation by physical adsorption. Chitosan coating was chosen due to its antimicrobial properties and readiness to be functionalized. Surface characterization demonstrated the chemoselective immobilization of the peptide with different spacers in a similar concentration (∼2 ng/cm2). Efficacy assays demonstrated that covalent immobilization of Dhvar5 exposing its cationic end, improves the chitosan coating antimicrobial effect by decreasing Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) colonization. This effect was enhanced when longer spacers were used independently of their flexibility. In opposite, immobilized Dhvar5 exposing its hydrophobic end has no effect on bacterial adhesion to chitosan, and when adsorbed in a random orientation even induces bacterial adhesion to chitosan coating.

HLF1-11 (GRRRRSVQWCA) is an antimicrobial peptide (AMP) with high activity against methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA), the most prevalent species in implant-associated infection. In this work, the effect of the surface immobilization on hLF1-11 antimicrobial activity was studied. Immobilization was performed onto chitosan thin films as a model for an implant coating due to its reported osteogenic and antibacterial properties. Chitosan thin films were produced by spin-coating on gold surfaces. hLF1-11 was immobilized onto these films by its C-terminal cysteine in an orientation that exposes the antimicrobial activity-related arginine-rich portion of the peptide. Two levels of exposure (with and without a polyethylene glycol (PEG) spacer) were analyzed. Covalent immobilization was further compared with the AMP physical adsorption onto chitosan films. Surfaces were characterized using ellipsometry, contact angle measurements, atomic force microscopy, infrared and X-ray photoelectron spectroscopies and using a fluorimetric assay for hLF1-11 quantification. Surface antimicrobial activity was assessed through surface adhesion and viability assays using an MRSA (S. aureus ATCC 33591). The incorporation of hLF1-11 increased significantly bacterial adhesion to chitosan films. However, the presence of hLF1-11, namely when immobilized through a PEG spacer, decreased the viability of adherent bacteria with regard to the control surface. These results demonstrated that hLF1-11 after covalent immobilization by its cysteine can maintain activity, particularly if a spacer is applied. However, further studies, exploring the opposite orientation or the same C-terminal orientation, but non-cysteine related, can help to clarify the potential of the hLF1-11 immobilization strategy.

Background: Chronic shoulder pain (CSP) is a common condition with various etiologies, including rotator cuff disorders, adhesive capsulitis, shoulder instability, and shoulder arthritis. It is associated with substantial disability and psychological distress, resulting in poor productivity and quality of life. Physical therapy constitutes the mainstay treatment for CSP, but several barriers exist in accessing care. In recent years, telerehabilitation has gained momentum as a potential solution to overcome such barriers. It has shown numerous benefits, including improving access and convenience, promoting patient adherence, and reducing costs. However, to date, no previous randomized controlled trial has compared fully remote digital physical therapy to in-person rehabilitation for nonoperative CSP. Objective: The aim of this study is to compare clinical outcomes between digital physical therapy and conventional in-person physical therapy in patients with CSP. Methods: We conducted a single-center, parallel-group, randomized controlled trial involving 82 patients with CSP referred for outpatient physical therapy. Participants were randomized into digital or conventional physical therapy (8-week interventions). The digital intervention consisted of home exercise, education, and cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT), using a device with movement digitalization for biofeedback and asynchronous physical therapist monitoring through a cloud-based portal. The conventional group received in-person physical therapy, including exercises, manual therapy, education, and CBT. The primary outcome was the change (baseline to 8 weeks) in function and symptoms using the short-form of Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand questionnaire. Secondary outcome measures included self-reported pain, surgery intent, analgesic intake, mental health, engagement, and satisfaction. All questionnaires were delivered electronically. Results: A total of 90 participants were randomized into digital or conventional physical therapy, with 82 receiving the allocated intervention. Both groups experienced significant improvements in function measured by the short-form of the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand questionnaire, with no differences between groups (–1.8, 95% CI –13.5 to 9.8; P=.75). For secondary outcomes, no differences were observed in surgery intent, analgesic intake, and mental health or worst pain. Higher reductions were observed in average and least pain in the conventional group, which, given the small effect sizes (least pain 0.15 and average pain 0.16), are unlikely to be clinically meaningful. High adherence and satisfaction were observed in both groups, with no adverse events. Conclusions: This study shows that fully remote digital programs can be viable care delivery models for CSP given their scalability and effectiveness, assessed through comparison with high-dosage in-person rehabilitation. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04636528); https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT04636528