HYGIENE
bacteria such as Gardnarella vaginalis. L. crispatus is the lactobacillus species
most present in the vaginal ecosystem and is considered protective and a biomarker of a healthy vaginal tract. A longitudinal study of 100 pregnant women suggests that L. crispatus promotes the stability of the healthy ecosystem, whereas L. gasseri and/or L. iners would be more likely to promote the emergence of dysbiosis. An inverse association has been observed
between L. crispatus and Gardnerella vaginalis, the latter being an opportunistic anaerobic vaginal pathogen and one of the main bacteria associated with bacterial vaginosis. L. iners is usually the only vaginal lactobacillus species that co-exists with pathogens in bacterial vaginosis (its prevalence is used as an indicator of vaginosis). It can be predominant in healthy vaginal flora as well as in vaginal dysbiosis. Compared to other species of symbiotic
lactobacilli, L. iners has unique characteristics. Its morphology is different (coccobacillus), it is only able to produce L-lactic acid when other lactobacilli produce D and L forms, and it does not produce H2
O2 A IL1a
400 350 300 250 200 150 100 50 0
Control **
-76% *
40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0
10µg/ml PMA
Dexamethasone 0.1µM
polysaccharides 2%
Red kapok flower
C IL1β . These characteristics
make it less effective in preventing invasion by pathogens. However, L. iners has stronger binding abilities to human fibronectin, which may contribute to its persistence despite the presence of pathogens in dysbiosis. Its beneficial or pathogenic role for the host
remains controversial, L. iners is considered to offer limited protection against pathogen colonization and may contribute to the initiation and maintenance of vaginal dysbiosis.
Study of the prebiotic effect on lactobacilli: evaluation of bacterial growth and metabolism The prebiotic efficacy of red kapok flower polysaccharides was evaluated on five representative Lactobacillus strains of the vaginal tract; the extract was also studied in a reconstructed model of vaginal epithelium colonized by representative lactobacillus strains
L. gasseri (Log10 CFU/ml) 4h Control Glucose 2%
7.98 ± 0.01 7.81 ± 0.27
RKFP 0.125% 7.89 ± 0.14 RKFP 0.25% RKFP 0.5% RKFP 1%
24h
3.10 ± 0.28 3.42 ± 0.14 2.49 ± 0.12*
3.27 ± 0.38 4h
7.77 ± 0.13 7.73 ± 0.23
8.01 ± 0.19 0.00 ± 0.00** 7.74 ± 0.08 8.02 ± 0.10
10.40 ± 0.24** 3.73 ± 0.07 L. crispatus
(Log10 CFU/ml) 4h
24h Control 7.84
Glucose 2% 9.24 RKFP 0.25% 8.64 RKFP 1%
8.79
7.29 8.29
L. jensenii
(Log10 CFU/ml) 4h
24h
7.23 9.23
8.26* 8.55*
8.28 8.84 8.47
7.78 9.01** 8.97 Control Glucose 2%
60 50 40 30 20 10 0
Control **
-50% ns
-81% *
700 600 500 400 300 200 100 0
10µg/ml PMA
Dexamethasone 0.1µM
polysaccharides 2%
Red kapok flower
Control *** D PGE2 Control ***
-54% ***
-38% ***
B TNFa
83
10µg/ml PMA
Dexamethasone 0.1µM
polysaccharides 2%
Red kapok flower
-69% **
-100% ***
10µg/ml PMA
Dexamethasone 0.1µM
polysaccharides 2%
Red kapok flower
Figure 1: Effect of red kapok flower polysaccharides on the level of secretion of inflammatory markers IL1a, TNFa, IL1b and PGE2 in keratinocytes subjected to inflammatory stress using PMA. $$ p<0.01 vs control; * p<0.05; ** p<0.01; *** p<0.001 and ns = not significant vs PMA. One-factor ANOVA followed by Tukey’s test
of the resident microflora. Red kapok flower polysaccharides showed
a positive effect on the growth of different lactobacilli (L. gasseri, L. acidophilus, L. rhamnosus, L. crispatus and L. jensenii). These results show a prebiotic effect of the active ingredient on these strains. This effect is similar or even superior to the positive control (glucose) (Table 1). In addition, the active ingredient showed a bacteriostatic and even
L. acidophilus (Log10 CFU/ml)
24h
7.72 ± 0.13 8.99 ± 0.55* 6.10 ± 0.57
8.10 ± 0.58 6.29 ± 0.02 8.83 ± 0.18
6.63 ± 0.25 L. rhamnosus (Log10 CFU/ml) 4h
5.84 ± 0.09 7.82 ± 0.21 7.22 ± 0.15
24h 8.23 ± 0.00
7.83 ± 0.06 9.09 ± 0.07 7.77 ± 0.10
8.89 ± 0.27
7.83 ± 0.06 8.51 ± 0.56 7.74 ± 0.06 7.82 ± 0.01* 8.75 ± 0.11** 10.35 ± 0.04*
G. vaginalis
(Log10 CFU/ml) 4h
24h
8.7 9.4
Ciprofloxacin 5.47
8.87 9.32 4.71
E. coli
(Log10 CFU/ml) 4h
24h
8.98 8.46 5.39
8.64 8.78 2.56
RKFP 0.25% 8.99 7.67** 8.02** 8.33 RKFP 1%
Table 1: Effect of red kapok flower polysaccharides (RKFP) on the growth of strains in the vaginal tract. * p<0.05 ; ** p<0.01 vs Control. One-factor ANOVA followed by Tukey’s test
www.personalcaremagazine.com 7.19* 7.04** 7.88* 7.25**
antimicrobial effect by inhibiting the growth of G. vaginalis and E. coli, two pathogenic strains (Table 1). The red kapok flower polysaccharides also
increased the production of lactic acid by L. acidophilus, thus promoting the metabolism of lactobacilli (Table 2). Lactic acid is very important for the vaginal flora because it maintains an acidic pH in this area, which is essential for maintaining a healthy vaginal flora. Protective effect on reconstituted vaginal epithelium Scanning electron microscopy analysis showed the presence of membrane microvesicles on the surface of the bacteria. These microvesicles are present in greater quantity in the condition treated with 0.5% red kapok flower extract (Figure 2). Microvesicles are bilayer structures that form
from the outer membrane of bacteria and are important for the transport of biomolecules to other bacteria or to host cells. They therefore play a role in Bacteria/Host interactions. Membrane microvesicles have long been
associated with the virulence of pathogenic bacteria (transport of toxins, proteins involved in resistance to AB or in biofilm formation etc.). Recently, the presence of microvesicles has been described in commensal bacteria such as lactobacilli, they are then associated with the probiotic properties of these bacteria by playing a role in the activation of the immune system and host defenses, the regulation of the bacterial community or the maintenance of the balance of the microbiota.10-13 By inducing the formation of membrane
microvesicles, red kapok flower polysaccharides March 2023 PERSONAL CARE
IL1β (pg/ml)
IL 1a (pg/ml)
PGE2 (pg/ml)
TNFa (pg/ml)
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98 |
Page 99 |
Page 100 |
Page 101 |
Page 102 |
Page 103
