Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Evaluates enhanced antimicrobial activity of rosemary essential oil nanoparticles in multidrug-resistant bacteria, indicating significant efficacy.
The current work aimed to formulate Rosemary essential oil nanoparticles (Ros-ES-NPs) and evaluate their antimicrobial effect in comparison with free oil (Ros- ES). Physicochemical characterization was performed using Fourier-transform infrared spectroscopy (FTIR), dynamic light scattering, zeta potential analysis, transmission electron microscop y (TEM), scanning electron microscopy (SEM), and thermogravimetric analysis (TGA). The cytotoxic activity of Ros-ES-NPs on human lung fibroblast cell line (Wi-38) was examined in comparison with Ros- ES using MTT assay. Ros-ES exhibited dose-dependent cytotoxicity, with an IC 50 of approximately 6.06 mg/ml on Wi-38. In contrast, the Ros-ES-NPs not only showed no toxicity but actually appeared to increase cell viability (up to ≈ 136%) possibly due to high metabolic actvity. The antimicrobial activity of Ros-ES and Ros-ES-NPs was evaluated against three isolates of Multidrug-Resistant Bacteria, comprising two Gram-negative isolates ( Shigella flexneri and Klebsiella pneumoniae ) and one Gram-positive isolate ( Streptococcus pneumoniae ), alongside C andida albicans as the fungal pathogen. Ros-ES-NPs showed a significant antimicrobial efficacy against all isolates under study where, at 25 mg/ml, Ros-ES inhibited K. pneumoniae and Shigella flexneri by 55.16 ± 0.09% and 76.47 ± 1.16%, respectively, whereas Ros-ES-NPs showed inhibition rates of 95.66 ± 9.74% and 87.13 ± 2.63%, respectively. Against Streptococcus pneumoniae , at 25 mg/ml, Ros-ES inhibited by 68.75 ± 0.60%, while Ros-ES-NPs exhibited a higher inhibition rate of 80.73 ± 5.6%. In case of C. albicans , Ros-Es showed a higher inhibition (81.85 ± 0.54) than Ros-Es-NPs (60.39 ± 5.69). Rosemary essential oil nano-formulation significantly enhances antibacterial efficacy while improving biocompatibility and inducing pronounced microbial DNA damage.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Ahmed et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: