Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33314723›Full record

ReviewInternational wound journal2021

Update on the role of antiseptics in the management of chronic wounds with critical colonisation and/or biofilm.

Paulo J Alves, Ruben T Barreto, Brigitte M Barrois, Luc G Gryson, Sylvie Meaume, Stan J Monstrey

Open access · hybridAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in International wound journal, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 50 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
50citing papers in PubMed
5.8field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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

50 citing papers in PubMed, 108 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Antiseptic chitosan acetate-chlorhexidine spray for wound cleaning.Journal of materials science. Materials in medicine · 2026
    Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025
    Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. Review
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

6 authors at 6 institutions in 3 countries.

Paulo J AlvesWounds Research Laboratory, Universidade Católica Portuguesa, Porto, Portugal.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6348-3316
Ruben T BarretoAdvanced Wound Diagnosis and Treatment Centre, Funchal, Portugal.
Brigitte M BarroisSociété Française de l'Escarre, Saint-Saturnin, France.
Luc G GrysonBelgian Defence Military Medical Component, Brussels, Belgium.
Sylvie MeaumeDepartment of Geriatrics and Wound Care Unit, Hospital Rothschild, APHP Assistance Publique Hôpitaux de Paris, Sorbonne Université, Paris, France.
Stan J MonstreyDepartment of Plastic Surgery, Ghent University Hospital, Ghent, Belgium.
Ghent University Hospital · BEHospital Dr. Nélio Mendonça · PTQueen Astrid Military Hospital · BESociété Française d'Allergologie · FRSorbonne Université · FRUniversidade Católica Portuguesa · PT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Biofilms play a major role in delaying chronic wounds from healing. A wound infiltrated with biofilm, or "critically colonised" wound, may become clinically infected if the number of microbes exceeds a critical level. Chronic wound biofilms represent a significant treatment challenge by demonstrating recalcitrance towards antimicrobial agents. However, a "window of opportunity" may exist after wound debridement when biofilms are more susceptible to topical antiseptics. Here, we discuss the role of antiseptics in the management of chronic wounds and biofilm, focusing on povidone-iodine (PVP-I) in comparison with two commonly used antiseptics: polyhexanide (PHMB) and silver. This article is based on the literature reviewed during a focus group meeting on antiseptics in wound care and biofilm management, and on a PubMed search conducted in March 2020. Compared with PHMB and silver, PVP-I has a broader spectrum of antimicrobial activity, potent antibiofilm efficacy, no acquired bacterial resistance or cross-resistance, low cytotoxicity, good tolerability, and an ability to promote wound healing. PVP-I represents a viable therapeutic option in wound care and biofilm management, with the potential to treat biofilm-infiltrated, critically colonised wounds. We propose a practical algorithm to guide the management of chronic, non-healing wounds due to critical colonisation or biofilm, using PVP-I.

Indexed as

Anti-Infective Agents, LocalBacterial InfectionsWound InfectionBiofilmsHumansPovidone-IodineWound HealingAnti-Infective Agents, LocalPovidone-Iodinebiguanidesbiofilmspovidone-iodinesilverwound healing

Identifiers

PMID33314723
PMCPMC8244012
OpenAlexW3113367115

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.