ArticleAvicenna journal of medical biotechnology
Article in Avicenna journal of medical biotechnology. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- Enhancing antimicrobial efficacy against Pseudomonas aeruginosa biofilm through carbon dot-mediated photodynamic inactivation.AMB Express · 2024Article
- Photodynamic Therapy Combined with Antibiotics or Antifungals against Microorganisms That Cause Skin and Soft Tissue Infections: A Planktonic and Biofilm Approach to Overcome Resistances.Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Review
- Role of linezolid combination therapy for serious infections: review of the current evidence.European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology · 2020Review
- Combined Antimicrobial Activity of Photodynamic Inactivation and Antimicrobials-State of the Art.Frontiers in microbiology · 2018Review
- A Multidisciplinary Study to Evaluate the Anti-quorum Sensing Ability of Phyto-compounds inAvicenna journal of medical biotechnologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundBiofilm infections are a major challenge in medical practice. Bacteria that live in a biofilm phenotype are more resistant to both antimicrobial therapy and host immune responses compared to their planktonic counterparts. So, there is need for new therapeutic strategies to combat these infections. A promising approach [known as Photodynamic Inactivation (PDI)] to kill bacteria growing as biofilms uses light in combination with a photosensitizer to induce a phototoxic reaction which produces reactive oxygen species that can destroy lipids and proteins causing cell death. PDI does not always guarantee full success, so, combination of PDI with antibiotics may give increased efficiency. This study aimed to determine if PDI was effective in the eradication of
methodsThe susceptibility of biofilm cultures of three
resultsBactericidal activity (≥3 log
conclusionThis study showed that although TBO-PDI did not have good bactericidal activity against
Indexed as
Identifiers
28090280PMC5219822W2590516909What 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.