Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33251437›Full record

ArticleACS omega2020

Antibacterial Porous Electrospun Fibers as Skin Scaffolds for Wound Healing Applications.

Georg-Marten Lanno, Celia Ramos, Liis Preem, Marta Putrinš, Ivo Laidmäe, Tanel Tenson, Karin Kogermann

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in ACS omega, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 34 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
34citing papers in PubMed
3.8field-weighted citation impact, top 6% 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

34 citing papers in PubMed, 95 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Hydrogel Design to Understand and Guide 3D Cell Migration.Regenerative engineering and translational medicine · 2025
    Review
  7. Review
  8. Cooling wound dressings: Prospects for clinical practice.Clinical and translational medicine · 2024
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Georg-Marten LannoInstitute of Technology, University of Tartu, Nooruse 1, 50411 Tartu, Estonia.
Celia RamosInstitute of Pharmacy, University of Tartu, Nooruse 1, 50411 Tartu, Estonia.
Liis PreemInstitute of Pharmacy, University of Tartu, Nooruse 1, 50411 Tartu, Estonia.
Marta PutrinšInstitute of Technology, University of Tartu, Nooruse 1, 50411 Tartu, Estonia.
Ivo LaidmäeInstitute of Pharmacy, University of Tartu, Nooruse 1, 50411 Tartu, Estonia.
Tanel TensonInstitute of Technology, University of Tartu, Nooruse 1, 50411 Tartu, Estonia.
Karin KogermannInstitute of Pharmacy, University of Tartu, Nooruse 1, 50411 Tartu, Estonia.
University of Tartu · EE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Electrospun fiber scaffolds have a huge potential for the successful treatment of infected wounds based on their unique properties. Although several studies report novel drug-loaded electrospun fiber-based biomaterials, many of these do not provide information on their interactions with eukaryotic and bacterial cells. The main aim of this study was to develop antibacterial drug-loaded porous biocompatible polycaprolactone (PCL) fiber scaffolds mimicking the native extracellular matrix for wound healing purposes. Mechanical property evaluation and different biorelevant tests were conducted in order to understand the structure-activity relationships and reveal how the surface porosity of fibers and the fiber diameter affect the scaffold interactions with the living bacterial and eukaryotic fibroblast cells. Cell migration and proliferation assays and antibiofilm assays enabled us to enlighten the biocompatibility and safety of fiber scaffolds and their suitability to be used as scaffolds for the treatment of infected wounds. Here, we report that porous PCL microfiber scaffolds obtained using electrospinning at high relative humidity served as the best surfaces for fibroblast attachment and growth compared to the nonporous microfiber or nonporous nanofiber PCL scaffolds. Porous chloramphenicol-loaded microfiber scaffolds were more elastic compared to nonporous scaffolds and had the highest antibiofilm activity. The results indicate that in addition to the fiber diameter and fiber scaffold porosity, the single-fiber surface porosity and its effect on drug release, mechanical properties, cell viability, and antibiofilm activity need to be understood when developing antibacterial biocompatible scaffolds for wound healing applications. We show that pores on single fibers within an electrospun scaffold, in addition to nano- and microscale diameter of the fibers, change the living cell-fiber interactions affecting the antibiofilm efficacy and biocompatibility of the scaffolds for the local treatment of wounds.

Identifiers

PMID33251437
PMCPMC7689890
OpenAlexW3105966959

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.