SpringerLink
Log in

A 3D-printed multi-compartment device that enables dynamic PK/PD profiles of antibiotics

  • Paper in Forefront
  • Published:
Analytical and Bioanalytical Chemistry Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Pathogens develop resistance to various drugs while under the selective pressure of antibiotics resulting in the emergence of bacterial strains that are resistant to multiple treatment options. Unfortunately, the resistance to antibiotics has also been accompanied by a reduction in the development of novel antibiotics to combat various pathogens. Current diagnostic tools, which are used in parts of the early developmental process of antibiotics, primarily consist of static susceptibility tests that do not resemble the pharmacokinetics of the therapy in vivo. Here, we designed and 3D-printed cubical inserts with membranes on two of the cube faces that allow diffusion of a molecule across two planes. These inserts are used with a 3D-printed device to create a two-compartment model to mimic the pharmacokinetics of a molecule in humans from multiple types of administration. Fluorescein was used to characterize the device and the diffusion of molecules from a flowing channel, through a membrane in the first plane (representing the primary compartment in vivo, or plasma), followed by measurement in the second compartment (that represents the interstitial fluid). The dynamic, two-compartment model was tested using both gram-positive and gram-negative bacterial strains in the secondary compartment. The ATP/OD600 (a measure of antibiotic activity) of a kanamycin-resistant E. coli strain challenged with the antibiotic levofloxacin increased after reaching an effective concentration of the antibiotic at 2 h, equating to a secondary compartment concentration of 3.5 ± 1.3 µM levofloxacin. The ATP/OD600 of a chloramphenicol-resistant B. subtilis strain challenged with the antibiotic levofloxacin remained steady or increased slightly after reaching an effective concentration of the antibiotic. The earliest statistical difference was detected 3 h after the start of the PK curve, which corresponds with a secondary compartment concentration of 4.8 ± 1.8 µM levofloxacin. Our results demonstrate that a fabricated 2-compartment model (1) provides realistic PK values to those published from in vivo studies and (2) can be used to determine antibiotic pharmacodynamics.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
EUR 32.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or Ebook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price includes VAT (Germany)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Fair RJ, Tor Y. Antibiotics and bacterial resistance in the 21st century. Perspect Med Chem. 2014;6:25–64.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Webster P. US tries to stem antimicrobial resistance. CMAJ: Can Med Assoc J = journal de l’Association medicale canadienne. 2014;186(16):1207.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Balouiri M, Sadiki M, Ibnsouda SK. Methods for in vitro evaluating antimicrobial activity: A review. J Pharm Anal. 2016;6(2):71–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Vaddady PK, Lee RE, Meibohm B. In vitro pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic models in anti-infective drug development: focus on TB. Future Med Chem. 2010;2(8):1355–69.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Jorgensen JH, Ferraro MJ. Antimicrobial susceptibility testing: a review of general principles and contemporary practices. Clin Infect Dis. 2009;49(11):1749–55.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Heller AA, Spence DM. A rapid method for post-antibiotic bacterial susceptibility testing. PLoS ONE. 2019;14(1): e0210534.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  7. Dhillon S, Kostrzewski A. Clinical Pharmacokinetics. London, U.K.: Pharmaceutical Press; 2006.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Gloede J, Scheerans C, Derendorf H, Kloft C. In vitro pharmacodynamic models to determine the effect of antibacterial drugs. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2010;65(2):186–201.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Keil S, Wiedemann B. Mathematical corrections for bacterial loss in pharmacodynamic in vitro dilution models. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1995;39(5):1054–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  10. White CA, Toothaker RD, Smith AL, Slattery JT. Correction for bacterial loss in in vitro dilution models. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1987;31(11):1859–60.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  11. Budha NR, Lee RB, Hurdle JG, Lee RE, Meibohm B. A simple in vitro PK/PD model system to determine time-kill curves of drugs against Mycobacteria. Tuberculosis (Edinb). 2009;89(5):378–85.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Blaser J, Stone BB, Zinner SH. Two compartment kinetic model with multiple artificial capillary units. J Antimicrob Chemother. 1985;15(Suppl A):131–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Garrison MW, Vance-Bryan K, Larson TA, Toscano JP, Rotschafer JC. Assessment of effects of protein binding on daptomycin and vancomycin killing of Staphylococcus aureus by using an in vitro pharmacodynamic model. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1990;34(10):1925–31.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  14. Reeves DS. Advantages and disadvantages of an in-vitro model with two compartments connected by a dialyser: results of experiments with ciprofloxacin. J Antimicrob Chemother. 1985;15(Suppl A):159–67.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Postek W, Pacocha N, Garstecki P. Microfluidics for antibiotic susceptibility testing. Lab Chip. 2022;22(19):3637–62.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Gross BC, Erkal JL, Lockwood SY, Chen C, Spence DM. Evaluation of 3D printing and its potential impact on biotechnology and the chemical sciences. Anal Chem. 2014;86(7):3240–53.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Singh D, Deosarkar SP, Cadogan E, Flemington V, Bray A, Zhang J, et al. A microfluidic system that replicates pharmacokinetic (PK) profiles in vitro improves prediction of in vivo efficacy in preclinical models. PLoS Biol. 2022;20(5): e3001624.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  18. **er CW, Heller AA, Spence DM. A Printed Equilibrium Dialysis Device with Integrated Membranes for Improved Binding Affinity Measurements. Anal Chem. 2017;89(14):7302–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  19. Castiaux AD, **er CW, Spence DM. Ultrafiltration binding analyses of glycated albumin with a 3D-printed syringe attachment. Anal Bioanal Chem. 2018;410(29):7565–73.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. **er CW, Heller AA, Spence DM. A Printed Equilibrium Dialysis Device with Integrated Membranes for Improved Binding Affinity Measurements. Anal Chem. 2017;89(14):7302–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  21. Heller AA. A Rapid Assay to Detect Antibiotic Resistance with Novel 3D Printed Pharmacokinetic/Pharmacodynamic Technologies. Doctoral dissertation, Michigan State University, East Lansing. 2019.

  22. Lockwood SY, Meisel JE, Monsma FJ Jr, Spence DM. A Diffusion-Based and Dynamic 3D-Printed Device That Enables Parallel in Vitro Pharmacokinetic Profiling of Molecules. Anal Chem. 2016;88(3):1864–70.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  23. Vrany JD, Stewart PS, Suci PA. Comparison of recalcitrance to ciprofloxacin and levofloxacin exhibited by Pseudomonas aeruginosa bofilms displaying rapid-transport characteristics. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1997;41(6):1352–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  24. Ratnayake PU, Prabodha Ekanayaka EA, Komanduru SS, Weliky DP. Full-length trimeric influenza virus hemagglutinin II membrane fusion protein and shorter constructs lacking the fusion peptide or transmembrane domain: Hyperthermostability of the full-length protein and the soluble ectodomain and fusion peptide make significant contributions to fusion of membrane vesicles. Protein Expr Purif. 2016;117:6–16.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Halder S, Parrell D, Whitten D, Feig M, Kroos L. Interaction of intramembrane metalloprotease SpoIVFB with substrate Pro-sigma(K). Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2017;114(50):E10677–86.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  26. Fish DN, Chow AT. The clinical pharmacokinetics of levofloxacin. Clin Pharmacokinet. 1997;32(2):101–19.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Reddy VSRK, Narayan KL. The concentration of digoxin after intravenous and oral administration studied by a two-compartment model. Letters in Biomathematics. 2019;6(2):1–15.

  28. Sharma P, Patel N, Prasad B, Varma MVS. Pharmacokinetics: Theory and Application in Drug Discovery and Development. In: Poduri R, editor. Drug Discovery and Development: From Targets and Molecules to Medicines. Singapore: Springer Singapore; 2021. p. 297–355.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  29. Unger RE, Huang Q, Peters K, Protzer D, Paul D, Kirkpatrick CJ. Growth of human cells on polyethersulfone (PES) hollow fiber membranes. Biomaterials. 2005;26(14):1877–84.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Unger RE, Peters K, Huang Q, Funk A, Paul D, Kirkpatrick CJ. Vascularization and gene regulation of human endothelial cells growing on porous polyethersulfone (PES) hollow fiber membranes. Biomaterials. 2005;26(17):3461–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Chemistry, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI, 48824, USA

    Andrew A. Heller & Dana M. Spence

  2. Institute for Quantitative Health Sciences & Engineering, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI, 48824, USA

    Andrew A. Heller, Morgan K. Geiger & Dana M. Spence

  3. Department of Biomedical Engineering, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI, 48824, USA

    Dana M. Spence

Authors
  1. Andrew A. Heller
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Morgan K. Geiger
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Dana M. Spence
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Dana M. Spence.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher's note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary information

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary file1 (DOCX 2.26 mb)

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Heller, A.A., Geiger, M.K. & Spence, D.M. A 3D-printed multi-compartment device that enables dynamic PK/PD profiles of antibiotics. Anal Bioanal Chem 415, 6135–6144 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00216-023-04899-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00216-023-04899-x

Keywords

Search

Navigation