Jump to Main Content
In vitro evaluation of methicillin-resistant and methicillin-sensitive Staphylococcus aureus susceptibility to Saudi honeys
- Hussain, Muhammad Barkaat, Kamel, Yasser Mahmoud, Ullah, Zia, Jiman-Fatani, Asif Ahmad Mohamad, Ahmad, Ansar Shafiq
- BMC complementary and alternative medicine 2019 v.19 no.1 pp. 185
- Escherichia coli, Geographical Locations, agar, alternative medicine, antibacterial properties, antibiotic resistance, catalase, hydrogen, in vitro studies, manuka honey, methicillin, methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus, minimum inhibitory concentration, pathogens
- BACKGROUND: Honey has been increasingly recognized as a potential therapeutic agent for treatment of wound infections. There is an urgent need for assessment and evaluation of the antibacterial properties against wound pathogens of honeys that have not yet been tested. METHODS: Ten Saudi honeys collected from different geographical locations were screened initially for their antibacterial potential against methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) and methicillin-sensitive Staphylococcus aureus (MSSA) by the agar well diffusion method. Manuka honey (UMF-12) was used for comparison. Of the tested honeys, the honey that exhibited the greatest antibacterial activity in the agar well diffusion assay was further evaluated for its minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) against ten MRSA clinical isolates and three American Type Culture Collection (ATCC) reference strains by the microbroth dilution method. RESULTS: Locally produced honeys exhibited variable antibacterial activity against the tested isolates in the agar well diffusion assay. They were unable to exhibit antibacterial activity against MSSA and MRSA at 25% dilutions (w/v) in catalase solution. However, Sumra and Talha honeys showed a zone of inhibition at 50% dilutions (w/v) in catalase solution. This finding means that both honeys possess weak non-peroxide-based antibacterial activity. Moreover, Sumra honey showed a larger inhibition zone at 50 and 25% dilutions (w/v) in distilled water than Manuka honey against both MSSA and MRSA. This result demonstrates that Sumra honey has more hydrogen peroxide-related antibacterial activity or total antibacterial activity than Manuka honey. In addition, MIC results obtained through a microbroth dilution assay showed that Sumra honey inhibited the growth of all MRSA clinical isolates (n = 10) and reference strains [MRSA (ATCC 43300) and MSSA (ATCC 29213)] at lower concentrations (12.0% v/v) than those required for Manuka honey-mediated inhibition (14.0% v/v). This result means that Sumra honey has more peroxide or synergistic antibacterial activity than Manuka honey. An equivalent MIC (15.0% v/v) was observed for E. coli (ATCC 25922) between Manuka honey and Sumra honey. CONCLUSIONS: Sumra honey may be used as an alternative therapeutic agent for infected wounds and burns, where additional hydrogen peroxide-related antibacterial activity is needed. In the future, the physiochemical characteristics of Sumra honey may be evaluated and standardized.