Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31546922›Full record

ArticlePharmaceutics2019

Monitoring of Antimicrobial Drug Chloramphenicol Release from Electrospun Nano- and Microfiber Mats Using UV Imaging and Bacterial Bioreporters.

Liis Preem, Frederik Bock, Mariliis Hinnu, Marta Putrinš, Kadi Sagor, Tanel Tenson, Andres Meos, Jesper Østergaard, Karin Kogermann

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Pharmaceutics, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
1.0field-weighted citation impact, top 24% 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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 25 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Development ofMolecular pharmaceutics · 2023
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Development of Rapid and Economic In Vitro Assay and Biorelevant Ex Vivo Biofilm Inhibition Wound Model to Test the Antibacterial Efficacy of Wound Dressings.Wound repair and regeneration : official publication of the Wound Healing Society [and] the European Tissue Repair Society
    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

9 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Liis PreemInstitute of Pharmacy, Faculty of Medicine, University of Tartu, Nooruse 1, 50411 Tartu, Estonia. liis.preem@ut.ee.
Frederik BockDepartment of Pharmacy, University of Copenhagen, Universitetsparken 2, DK-2100 Copenhagen Ø, Denmark. frederik.bock@sund.ku.dk.ORCID 0000-0002-2902-0238
Mariliis HinnuInstitute of Technology, Faculty of Natural Sciences, University of Tartu, Nooruse 1, 50411 Tartu, Estonia. mariliis.hinnu@ut.ee.ORCID 0000-0002-6096-0658
Marta PutrinšInstitute of Technology, Faculty of Natural Sciences, University of Tartu, Nooruse 1, 50411 Tartu, Estonia. marta.putrins@ut.ee.
Kadi SagorInstitute of Technology, Faculty of Natural Sciences, University of Tartu, Nooruse 1, 50411 Tartu, Estonia. kadisagor@gmail.com.
Tanel TensonInstitute of Technology, Faculty of Natural Sciences, University of Tartu, Nooruse 1, 50411 Tartu, Estonia. tanel.tenson@ut.ee.
Andres MeosInstitute of Pharmacy, Faculty of Medicine, University of Tartu, Nooruse 1, 50411 Tartu, Estonia. andres.meos@ut.ee.
Jesper ØstergaardDepartment of Pharmacy, University of Copenhagen, Universitetsparken 2, DK-2100 Copenhagen Ø, Denmark. jesper.ostergaard@sund.ku.dk.ORCID 0000-0003-3448-4237
Karin KogermannInstitute of Pharmacy, Faculty of Medicine, University of Tartu, Nooruse 1, 50411 Tartu, Estonia. karin.kogermann@ut.ee.
University of Tartu · EEUniversity of Copenhagen · DK

Funding

Eesti Teadusagentuur ETF7980Eesti Teadusagentuur PRG335Eesti Teadusagentuur PUT1088European Regional Development Fund Centre of Excellence for Molecular Cell Technology
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

New strategies are continuously sought for the treatment of skin and wound infections due to increased problems with non-healing wounds. Electrospun nanofiber mats with antibacterial agents as drug delivery systems provide opportunities for the eradication of bacterial infections as well as wound healing. Antibacterial activities of such mats are directly linked with their drug release behavior. Traditional pharmacopoeial drug release testing settings are not always suitable for analyzing the release behavior of fiber mats intended for the local drug delivery. We tested and compared different drug release model systems for the previously characterized electrospun chloramphenicol (CAM)-loaded nanofiber (polycaprolactone (PCL)) and microfiber (PCL in combination with polyethylene oxide) mats with different drug release profiles. Drug release into buffer solution and hydrogel was investigated and drug concentration was determined using either high-performance liquid chromatography, ultraviolet-visible spectrophotometry, or ultraviolet (UV) imaging. The CAM release and its antibacterial effects in disc diffusion assay were assessed by bacterial bioreporters. All tested model systems enabled to study the drug release from electrospun mats. It was found that the release into buffer solution showed larger differences in the drug release rate between differently designed mats compared to the hydrogel release tests. The UV imaging method provided an insight into the interactions with an agarose hydrogel mimicking wound tissue, thus giving us information about early drug release from the mat. Bacterial bioreporters showed clear correlations between the drug release into gel and antibacterial activity of the electrospun CAM-loaded mats.

Indexed as

antibacterial activitybacterial bioreportersdrug releaseelectrospinningmicrofibersnanofibersUV imaging

Identifiers

PMID31546922
PMCPMC6781501
OpenAlexW2974008950

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.