ArticlePloS one2016
A Novel Computerized Cell Count Algorithm for Biofilm Analysis.
Article in PloS one, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 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
15 citing papers in PubMed, 30 citations in OpenAlex.
- Anti-Cariogenic Potential of Lyophilized Cell-Free Supernatant of ProbioticJournal of microbiology and biotechnology · 2026Article
- BacQuant: A Scalable Automated Image Processing Pipeline for Quantifying Biofilm Aggregates.microPublication biology · 2026Article
- Automated AI-based grading of neuroendocrine tumors using Ki-67 proliferation index: comparative evaluation and performance analysis.Medical & biological engineering & computing · 2024Article
- Review
- Advances and opportunities in image analysis of bacterial cells and communities.FEMS microbiology reviews · 2021Article
- Biofilm viability checker: An open-source tool for automated biofilm viability analysis from confocal microscopy images.NPJ biofilms and microbiomes · 2021Article
- Quantification of Staphylococcus aureus Biofilm Formation by Crystal Violet and Confocal Microscopy.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2021Article
- The combination of silver-containing hydroxyapatite coating and vancomycin has a synergistic antibacterial effect on methicillin-resistantBone & joint research · 2020Article
- Biofilm Challenge: Lactic Acid Bacteria Isolated from Bovine Udders versus Staphylococci.Foods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2019Article
- Clinically Approved Drugs Inhibit theFrontiers in microbiology · 2019Article
- Safety and Efficacy of Topical Chitogel- Deferiprone-Gallium Protoporphyrin in Sheep Model.Frontiers in microbiology · 2018Article
- Fast and simple tool for the quantification of biofilm-embedded cells sub-populations from fluorescent microscopic images.PloS one · 2018Article
- Interplay between Antibiotic Efficacy and Drug-Induced Lysis Underlies Enhanced Biofilm Formation at Subinhibitory Drug Concentrations.Antimicrobial agents and chemotherapy · 2018Article
- Antimicrobial Effects of Sulfonyl Derivative of 2(5Frontiers in microbiology · 2017Article
- Bactericidal Effect of a Photoresponsive Carbon Monoxide-Releasing Nonwoven against Staphylococcus aureus Biofilms.Antimicrobial agents and chemotherapy · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Biofilms are the preferred sessile and matrix-embedded life form of most microorganisms on surfaces. In the medical field, biofilms are a frequent cause of treatment failure because they protect the bacteria from antibiotics and immune cells. Antibiotics are selected according to the minimal inhibitory concentration (MIC) based on the planktonic form of bacteria. Determination of the minimal biofilm eradicating concentration (MBEC), which can be up to 1,000-fold greater than the MIC, is not currently conducted as routine diagnostic testing, primarily because of the methodical hurdles of available biofilm assessing protocols that are time- and cost-consuming. Comparative analysis of biofilms is also limited as most quantitative methods such as crystal violet staining are indirect and highly imprecise. In this paper, we present a novel algorithm for assessing biofilm resistance to antibiotics that overcomes several of the limitations of alternative methods. This algorithm aims for a computer-based analysis of confocal microscope 3D images of biofilms after live/dead stains providing various biofilm parameters such as numbers of viable and dead cells and their vertical distributions within the biofilm, or biofilm thickness. The performance of this algorithm was evaluated using computer-simulated 2D and 3D images of coccal and rodent cells varying different parameters such as cell density, shading or cell size. Finally, genuine biofilms that were untreated or treated with nitroxoline or colistin were analyzed and the results were compared with quantitative microbiological standard methods. This novel algorithm allows a direct, fast and reproducible analysis of biofilms after live/dead staining. It performed well in biofilms of moderate cell densities in a 2D set-up however the 3D analysis remains still imperfect and difficult to evaluate. Nevertheless, this is a first try to develop an easy but conclusive tool that eventually might be implemented into routine diagnostics to determine the MBEC and to improve outcomes of patients with biofilm-associated infections.
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.