Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32523939›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology2020

Antimicrobial Mechanisms and Effectiveness of Graphene and Graphene-Functionalized Biomaterials. A Scope Review.

Hiba Mohammed, Ajay Kumar, Elena Bekyarova, Yas Al-Hadeethi, Xixiang Zhang, Mingguang Chen, Mohammad Shahnawaze Ansari, Andrea Cochis, Lia Rimondini

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 111 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
111citing papers in PubMed
13.9field-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.

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

111 citing papers in PubMed, 295 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. Effects of Graphene Derivatives and Near-Infrared Laser Irradiation onInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2025
    Article

51 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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 4 institutions in 3 countries.

Hiba MohammedBiomaterials Lab, Department of Health Sciences, Università degli Studi del Piemonte Orientale, Novara, Italy.
Ajay KumarBiomaterials Lab, Department of Health Sciences, Università degli Studi del Piemonte Orientale, Novara, Italy.
Elena BekyarovaDepartment of Chemical and Environmental Engineering, University of California, Riverside, Riverside, CA, United States.
Yas Al-HadeethiDepartment of Physics, King Abdulaziz University, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia.
Xixiang ZhangAdvanced Nanofabrication, Imaging and Characterization Core Lab, King Abdullah University of Science and Technology, Thuwal, Saudi Arabia.
Mingguang ChenAdvanced Nanofabrication, Imaging and Characterization Core Lab, King Abdullah University of Science and Technology, Thuwal, Saudi Arabia.
Mohammad Shahnawaze AnsariCenter of Nanotechnology, King Abdulaziz University, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia.
Andrea CochisBiomaterials Lab, Department of Health Sciences, Università degli Studi del Piemonte Orientale, Novara, Italy.
Lia RimondiniBiomaterials Lab, Department of Health Sciences, Università degli Studi del Piemonte Orientale, Novara, Italy.
Università degli Studi del Piemonte Orientale “Amedeo Avogadro” · ITKing Abdulaziz University · SAKing Abdullah University of Science and Technology · SAUniversity of California, Riverside · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Bacterial infections represent nowadays the major reason of biomaterials implant failure, however, most of the available implantable materials do not hold antimicrobial properties, thus requiring antibiotic therapy once the infection occurs. The fast raising of antibiotic-resistant pathogens is making this approach as not more effective, leading to the only solution of device removal and causing devastating consequences for patients. Accordingly, there is a large research about alternative strategies based on the employment of materials holding intrinsic antibacterial properties in order to prevent infections. Between these new strategies, new technologies involving the use of carbon-based materials such as carbon nanotubes, fullerene, graphene and diamond-like carbon shown very promising results. In particular, graphene- and graphene-derived materials (GMs) demonstrated a broad range antibacterial activity toward bacteria, fungi and viruses. These antibacterial activities are attributed mainly to the direct physicochemical interaction between GMs and bacteria that cause a deadly deterioration of cellular components, principally proteins, lipids, and nucleic acids. In fact, GMs hold a high affinity to the membrane proteoglycans where they accumulate leading to membrane damages; similarly, after internalization they can interact with bacteria RNA/DNA hydrogen groups interrupting the replicative stage. Moreover, GMs can indirectly determine bacterial death by activating the inflammatory cascade due to active species generation after entering in the physiological environment. On the opposite, despite these bacteria-targeted activities, GMs have been successfully employed as pro-regenerative materials to favor tissue healing for different tissue engineering purposes. Taken into account these GMs biological properties, this review aims at explaining the antibacterial mechanisms underlying graphene as a promising material applicable in biomedical devices.

Indexed as

antibacterialbiomaterialsgraphene materialsgraphene oxidenanosheetreduced graphene oxide

Identifiers

PMID32523939
PMCPMC7261933
OpenAlexW3031060256

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.