ArticlePloS one2015
Distribution and Inhibition of Liposomes on Staphylococcus aureus and Pseudomonas aeruginosa Biofilm.
Article in PloS one, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 33 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
33 citing papers in PubMed, 92 citations in OpenAlex.
- Patient-Specific Coculture of S. aureus and P. aeruginosa Enhances Epithelial Barrier Disruption and Virulence in CRS.International forum of allergy & rhinology · 2026Article
- Therapeutic Potential of Emodin: A Mini-Review of Its Anti-Biofilm and Antimicrobial Effects.Infectious disorders drug targets · 2025Review
- Article
- Liposomal Rifabutin-A Promising Antibiotic Repurposing Strategy against Methicillin-ResistantPharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Anti-Staphylococcal Biofilm Effects of a Liposome-Based Formulation Containing Citrus Polyphenols.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Article
- Monitoring silica core@shell nanoparticle-bacterial film interactions using the multi-parametric surface plasmon resonance technique.Smart medicine · 2023Article
- Non disseminative nano-strategy against in vivo Staphylococcus aureus biofilms.NPJ biofilms and microbiomes · 2023Article
- Regulation ofPharmaceutics · 2023Review
- A Thermosensitive, Chitosan-Based Hydrogel as Delivery System for Antibacterial Liposomes to Surgical Site Infections.Pharmaceutics · 2022Article
- Protein corona mediated liposomal drug delivery for bacterial infection management.Asian journal of pharmaceutical sciences · 2022Article
- Natural Strategies as Potential Weapons against Bacterial Biofilms.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
- Recent Advances in Antimicrobial Nano-Drug Delivery Systems.Nanomaterials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
- Liposome-Encapsulated Tobramycin and IDR-1018 Peptide Mediated Biofilm Disruption and Enhanced Antimicrobial Activity againstPharmaceutics · 2022Article
- Nanotechnology in combating biofilm: A smart and promising therapeutic strategy.Frontiers in microbiology · 2022Review
- Nano-fats for bugs: the benefits of lipid nanoparticles for antimicrobial therapy.Drug delivery and translational research · 2021Review
- Mycobacterium abscessus biofilms have viscoelastic properties which may contribute to their recalcitrance in chronic pulmonary infections.Scientific reports · 2021Article
- Liposomes as a Nanoplatform to Improve the Delivery of Antibiotics intoPharmaceutics · 2021Article
- Lipid-based nanosystems for targeting bone implant-associated infections: current approaches and future endeavors.Drug delivery and translational research · 2021Review
- Liposomes: Biomedical Applications.Chonnam medical journal · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundStaphylococcus aureus and Pseudomonas aeruginosa are major pathogens in chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) and their biofilms have been associated with poorer postsurgical outcomes. This study investigated the distribution and anti-biofilm effect of cationic (+) and anionic (-) phospholipid liposomes with different sizes (unilamellar and multilamellar vesicle, ULV and MLV respectively) on S. aureus and P. aeruginosa biofilms.
methodSpecific biofilm models for S. aureus ATCC 25923 and P. aeruginosa ATCC 15692 were established. Liposomal distribution was determined by observing SYTO9 stained biofilm exposed to DiI labeled liposomes using confocal scanning laser microscopy, followed by quantitative image analysis. The anti-biofilm efficacy study was carried out by using the alamarBlue assay to test the relative viability of biofilm treated with various liposomes for 24 hours and five minutes.
resultsThe smaller ULVs penetrated better than larger MLVs in both S. aureus and P. aeruginosa biofilm. Except that +ULV and -ULV displayed similar distribution in S. aureus biofilm, the cationic liposomes adhered better than their anionic counterparts. Biofilm growth was inhibited at 24-hour and five-minute exposure time, although the decrease of viability for P. aeruginosa biofilm after liposomal treatment did not reach statistical significance.
conclusionThe distribution and anti-biofilm effects of cationic and anionic liposomes of different sizes differed in S. aureus and P. aeruginosa biofilms. Reducing the liposome size and formulating liposomes as positively charged enhanced the penetration and inhibition of S. aureus and P. aeruginosa biofilms.
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.