Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31204648›Full record

ArticleSICOT-J2019

The antibacterial effect of sonication and its potential medical application.

Srinath Kamineni, Chifu Huang

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in SICOT-J, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.8field-weighted citation impact, top 25% 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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 19 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Srinath KamineniDepartment of Orthopaedics and Sports Medicine, Elbow Shoulder Research Center, University of Kentucky, 740 South Limestone, Lexington, 40536 KY, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-5140-2323
Chifu HuangCenter for Oral Health Research, College of Dentistry, University of Kentucky, Lexington, 40503 KY, USA.
University of Kentucky · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionRecent applications of ultrasonic probes include cataract removal and tennis elbow treatment. Early data support the use of ultrasonic probe debridement in the treatment of recalcitrant diabetic foot ulcers. No data are available concerning the potential antibacterial properties of the clinical grade, lower energy ultrasound probes. We investigated the effect of a clinically available ultrasonic debridement probe with respect to bacterial viability.

methodsA commercially available Tenex sonication machine with a Tx1 probe was used for this study. Three bacterial strains, aerobic and anaerobic, were investigated, G-negative (Porphyromonas gingivalis) and G-positive bacteria (Staphylococcus aureus and Streptococcus gordonii). These bacteria were cultured and tested with sonication for varying lengths of time (10, 30, 60, and 120 s). The tested bacterial samples were plated, the number of colonies on each plate counted, and the anti-bacterial effect was calculated. Statistical analysis was conducted using a one-way analysis of variance.

resultsSonication exhibited a significant time-dependent antibacterial effect. Statistically significant anti-bacterial effect was observed in all three species tested. When comparing the kill rate between the control and 120 s of sonication; S. gordonii had a 34% kill rate, S. aureus had a 60% kill rate, and P. gingivalis had a 64% kill rate. When comparing control to all of the time intervals tested, S. aureus kill rate was statistically significant at all times, S. gordonii was statistically significant at all times above 10 s, and P. gingivalis was only statistically significant at 120 s.

conclusionThis study demonstrates that a clinically available ultrasonic probe has an antibacterial effect against a wide spectrum of gram-positive, gram-negative, aerobic and anaerobic bacterial species. This may partially explain the dramatic healing of long-standing recalcitrant diabetic ulcers debrided with this device and may have a place in treating pathologies with bacterial mechanisms.

Identifiers

PMID31204648
PMCPMC6572995
OpenAlexW2952413641

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.