ArticleAntimicrobial agents and chemotherapy2015
Antibiofilm Activity of Low-Amperage Continuous and Intermittent Direct Electrical Current.
Article in Antimicrobial agents and chemotherapy, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
20 citing papers in PubMed.
- Recent Advances in Biofilm Control Technologies for the Food Industry.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Advanced Electrochemical Reamer (EC-Reamer) for Root Canal Treatment.European endodontic journal · 2023Article
- Physical Approaches to Prevent and Treat Bacterial Biofilm.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
- Article
- Antimicrobial Properties of TiOInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2022Article
- Probing Antimicrobial Halloysite/Biopolymer Composites with Electron Microscopy: Advantages and Limitations.Polymers · 2021Review
- Hypochlorous acid-generating electrochemical scaffold eliminates Candida albicans biofilms.Journal of applied microbiology · 2020Article
- Microampere Electric Current Causes Bacterial Membrane Damage and Two-Way Leakage in a Short Period of Time.Applied and environmental microbiology · 2020Article
- Electrochemical methods to enhance osseointegrated prostheses.Biomedical engineering letters · 2020Review
- Review
- Effect of Direct Electrical Current on Bones Infected withJBMR plus · 2019Article
- Activity of fixed direct electrical current in experimental Staphylococcus aureus foreign-body osteomyelitis.Diagnostic microbiology and infectious disease · 2019Article
- Understanding Biofilms and Novel Approaches to the Diagnosis, Prevention, and Treatment of Medical Device-Associated Infections.Infectious disease clinics of North America · 2018Review
- Controlling Streptococcus mutans and Staphylococcus aureus biofilms with direct current and chlorhexidine.AMB Express · 2017Article
- Electroceutical Approach for Impairing the Motility of Pathogenic Bacterium Using a Microfluidic Platform.Micromachines · 2017Article
- Activity of Electrical Current in Experimental Propionibacterium acnes Foreign-Body Osteomyelitis.Antimicrobial agents and chemotherapy · 2017Article
- Exposure of Bacterial Biofilms to Electrical Current Leads to Cell Death Mediated in Part by Reactive Oxygen Species.PloS one · 2016Article
- Direct Electrical Current Reduces Bacterial and Yeast Biofilm Formation.International journal of bacteriology · 2016Article
- Antibiofilm Activity of Electrical Current in a Catheter Model.Antimicrobial agents and chemotherapy · 2015Article
- Electrochemical biofilm control: a review.Biofouling · 2015Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Bacterial biofilms are difficult to treat using available antimicrobial agents, so new antibiofilm strategies are needed. We previously showed that 20, 200, and 2,000 μA of electrical current reduced bacterial biofilms of Staphylococcus aureus, Staphylococcus epidermidis, and Pseudomonas aeruginosa. Here, we tested continuous direct current at lower amperages, intermittent direct current, and combinations of surface materials (Teflon or titanium) and electrode compositions (stainless steel, graphite, titanium, or platinum) against S. aureus, S. epidermidis, and P. aeruginosa biofilms. In addition, we tested 200 or 2,000 μA for 1 and 4 days against biofilms of 33 strains representing 13 species of microorganisms. The logarithmic reduction factor was used to measure treatment effects. Using continuous current delivery, the lowest active amperage was 2 μA for 1, 4, or 7 days against P. aeruginosa and 5 μA for 7 days against S. epidermidis and S. aureus biofilms. Delivery of 200 μA for 4 h a day over 4 days reduced P. aeruginosa, S. aureus, and S. epidermidis biofilms on Teflon or titanium discs. A reduction of P. aeruginosa, S. aureus, and S. epidermidis biofilms was measured for 23 of 24 combinations of surface materials and electrode compositions tested. Four days of direct current delivery reduced biofilms of 25 of 33 strains studied. In conclusion, low-amperage current or 4 h a day of intermittent current delivered using a variety of electrode compositions reduced P. aeruginosa, S. aureus, and S. epidermidis biofilms on a variety of surface materials. The electricidal effect was observed against a majority of bacterial species studied.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.