Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30266920›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2018

Non-invasive nanosecond electroporation for biocontrol of surface infections: an in vivo study.

Vitalij Novickij, Auksė Zinkevičienė, Emilija Perminaitė, Robertas Čėsna, Eglė Lastauskienė, Algimantas Paškevičius, Jurgita Švedienė, Svetlana Markovskaja, Jurij Novickij, Irutė Girkontaitė

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
3.2field-weighted citation impact, top 9% 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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed, 27 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. The evolution of clinical guidelines for antimicrobial photodynamic therapy of skin.Photochemical & photobiological sciences : Official journal of the European Photochemistry Association and the European Society for Photobiology · 2022
    Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. 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

10 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Vitalij NovickijInstitute of High Magnetic Fields, Vilnius Gediminas Technical University, Vilnius, Lithuania. vitalij.novickij@vgtu.lt.
Auksė ZinkevičienėState Research Institute Centre for Innovative Medicine, Department of Immunology, Vilnius, Lithuania.
Emilija PerminaitėState Research Institute Centre for Innovative Medicine, Department of Immunology, Vilnius, Lithuania.
Robertas ČėsnaState Research Institute Centre for Innovative Medicine, Department of Immunology, Vilnius, Lithuania.
Eglė LastauskienėInstitute of Biosciences, Life Sciences Centre, Vilnius University, Vilnius, Lithuania.
Algimantas PaškevičiusLaboratory of Biodeterioration Research, Nature Research Centre, Vilnius, Lithuania.
Jurgita ŠvedienėLaboratory of Biodeterioration Research, Nature Research Centre, Vilnius, Lithuania.
Svetlana MarkovskajaLaboratory of Mycology, Nature Research Centre, Vilnius, Lithuania.
Jurij NovickijInstitute of High Magnetic Fields, Vilnius Gediminas Technical University, Vilnius, Lithuania.
Irutė GirkontaitėState Research Institute Centre for Innovative Medicine, Department of Immunology, Vilnius, Lithuania.
State Research Institute Centre for Innovative Medicine · LTNature Research Centre · LTVilnius Gediminas Technical University · LTVilnius University · LT

Funding

Lietuvos Mokslo Taryba (Research Council of Lithuania) LAT-02/2016
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Invasive infections caused by drug-resistant bacteria are frequently responsible for fatal sepsis, morbidity and mortality rates. In this work, we propose a new methodology based on nanosecond high frequency electric field bursts, which enables successful eradication of bacteria in vivo. High frequency (15 kHz) 15-25 kV/cm 300-900 ns pulsing bursts were used separately and in combination with acetic acid (0.1-1%) to treat Pseudomonas aeruginosa in a murine model. Acetic acid 1% alone was effective resulting in almost 10-fold reduction of bacteria viability, however combination of nanosecond electric field and acetic acid 1% treatment was the most successful showing almost full eradication (0.01% survival compared to control) of the bacteria in the contaminated area. The short duration of the pulses (sub-microsecond) and high frequency (kHz range) of the burst enabled reduction of the muscle contractions to barely detectable level while the proposed applicators ensured predominantly topical treatment, without electroporation of deeper tissues. The results of our study have direct application for treatment of wounds and ulcers when chemical treatment is no longer effective.

Indexed as

Pseudomonas aeruginosaAcetic AcidAnimalsElectroporationLuminescent MeasurementsMiceMice, Inbred BALB CPermeabilityPseudomonas InfectionsWound InfectionAcetic Acid

Identifiers

PMID30266920
PMCPMC6162327
OpenAlexW2893520946

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.