Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27212453›Full record

ArticleInternational wound journal2017

A surfactant-based wound dressing can reduce bacterial biofilms in a porcine skin explant model.

Qingping Yang, Christelle Larose, Alessandra C Della Porta, Gregory S Schultz, Daniel J Gibson

Registry-linked trialOpen access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International wound journal, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04880655 (A Randomized, Controlled Study Evaluating a Surfactant-based Wound Dressing for Tissue Salvage and Reduction in Surgical Burden), which is not on this map. Cited by 39 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
39citing papers in PubMed
10.5field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

NCT04880655 nacompletednot on this mapstarted 2021, after this paper: background citation

A Randomized, Controlled Study Evaluating a Surfactant-based Wound Dressing for Tissue Salvage and Reduction in Surgical Burden

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversity of TennesseeRan2021 to 2023Enrolled27ConditionsBurns, Partial-thickness BurnArmsWSD, Dressed with bacitracin and petrolatum gauze
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

39 citing papers in PubMed, 81 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Review
  3. An IntactJournal of ophthalmology · 2026
    Article
  4. Seeing beyond the obvious: pragmatic skin care guidance for infants 22-24 weeks gestational age.Journal of perinatology : official journal of the California Perinatal Association · 2025
    Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Assessment of antibiotic release and antibacterial efficacy from pendant glutathione hydrogels using ex vivo porcine skin.Journal of controlled release : official journal of the Controlled Release Society · 2024
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Biofilm-Associated Infections in Chronic Wounds and Their Management.Advances in experimental medicine and biology · 2023
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Qingping YangThe Institute for Wound Research at the University of Florida, Department of Obstetrics & Gynecology, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, USA.
Christelle LaroseThe Institute for Wound Research at the University of Florida, Department of Obstetrics & Gynecology, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, USA.
Alessandra C Della PortaThe Institute for Wound Research at the University of Florida, Department of Obstetrics & Gynecology, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, USA.
Gregory S SchultzThe Institute for Wound Research at the University of Florida, Department of Obstetrics & Gynecology, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, USA.
Daniel J GibsonThe Institute for Wound Research at the University of Florida, Department of Obstetrics & Gynecology, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, USA.
University of Florida · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Bacterial biofilms have been found in many, if not all, chronic wounds. Their excessive extracellular matrix secretion and the metabolic changes that they undergo render them highly tolerant of many antibiotic and antimicrobial treatments. Physical removal and/or disruption are a common approach to treating wounds suspected of having bacterial biofilms. While many of these techniques use mechanical energy as the primary means of removal, we have begun to investigate if surfactants could facilitate the removal of bacterial biofilms, or if they might sensitise the biofilms to antimicrobial interventions. We tested a new surfactant-based wound gel on an ex vivo porcine skin explant model infected with a functionally tolerant 3-day biofilm. The wounds were dressed with a surfactant-based gel directly on the wound or with moistened gauze. The wounds were then wiped daily with moistened gauze, and the gel or gauze was re-applied. Each day, an explant from each group was harvested and tested for total viable bacteria counts and viable biofilm-protected bacteria counts. The results show that daily wiping with moistened gauze led to an initial decrease of bacteria, but by day 3, the biofilm had been fully re-established to the same level prior to the beginning of treatment. For the surfactant-based treatment, there was no detectable functional biofilm after the first treatment. The gauze control, which was also subjected to daily wiping, still contained functional biofilms, indicating that this result was not due to wiping alone. The total bacteria in the surfactant-treated explants steadily decreased through day 3, when there were no detectable bacteria, while the wiping-only control bacteria counts remained steady. The use of a moist gauze to wipe the visually apparent slime off of a wound appears to be insufficient to reduce biofilm over a 3-day period. Daily application of the surfactant gel dressing and wiping reduced the biofilm to undetectable levels within 3 days in a skin explant model. A 3-day regimen of dressing the wound model with a surfactant gel followed by gentle removal of the gel by wiping with a moistened gauze appears to be a simple and adequate approach to removing a bacterial biofilm infection in an ex vivo model. Additional clinical evidence is needed to determine if this promising approach can perform the same in clinically infected chronic wounds.

Indexed as

BandagesAnimalsAnti-Infective AgentsBiofilmsFemaleHumansMalePseudomonas aeruginosaPseudomonas InfectionsSurface-Active AgentsSwineTransplantsWound HealingWound InfectionAnti-Infective AgentsSurface-Active AgentsBiofilmGel dressingSurfactant

Identifiers

PMID27212453
PMCPMC7950006
OpenAlexW2401095945

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

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.