Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34834333›Full record

ReviewPharmaceutics2021

Antimicrobial Peptides in the Battle against Orthopedic Implant-Related Infections: A Review.

Bruna Costa, Guillermo Martínez-de-Tejada, Paula A C Gomes, M Cristina L Martins, Fabíola Costa

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Pharmaceutics, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
26citing papers in PubMed
4.2field-weighted citation impact, top 5% 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

26 citing papers in PubMed, 45 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Effect of Camel Peptide on the Biofilm ofAntibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023
    Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Review
  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

5 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Bruna Costai3S-Instituto de Investigação e Inovação em Saúde, Universidade do Porto, Rua Alfredo Allen, 208, 4200-135 Porto, Portugal.ORCID 0000-0002-2409-5847
Guillermo Martínez-de-TejadaDepartment of Microbiology and Parasitology, University of Navarra, Irunlarrea, 1, 31008 Pamplona, Spain.ORCID 0000-0003-3755-451X
Paula A C GomesCIQ-UP e Centro de Investigação em Química da Universidade do Porto, Departamento de Química e Bioquímica, Faculdade de Ciências, Universidade do Porto, 4169-007 Porto, Portugal.ORCID 0000-0002-6018-4724
M Cristina L Martinsi3S-Instituto de Investigação e Inovação em Saúde, Universidade do Porto, Rua Alfredo Allen, 208, 4200-135 Porto, Portugal.ORCID 0000-0002-6574-4794
Fabíola Costai3S-Instituto de Investigação e Inovação em Saúde, Universidade do Porto, Rua Alfredo Allen, 208, 4200-135 Porto, Portugal.ORCID 0000-0001-8981-7049
Universidade do Porto · PTNavarre Institute of Health Research · ES

Funding

Fundação para a Ciência e Tecnologia CEECIND/01921/2017Fundação para a Ciência e Tecnologia SFRH/BD/147027/2019Fundação para a Ciência e Tecnologia UIDB/50006/2020
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Prevention of orthopedic implant-related infections is a major medical challenge, particularly due to the involvement of biofilm-encased and multidrug-resistant bacteria. Current therapies, based on antibiotic administration, have proven to be insufficient, and infection prevalence may rise due to the dissemination of antibiotic resistance. Antimicrobial peptides (AMPs) have attracted attention as promising substitutes of conventional antibiotics, owing to their broad-spectrum of activity, high efficacy at very low concentrations, and, importantly, low propensity for inducing resistance. The aim of this review is to offer an updated perspective of the development of AMPs-based preventive strategies for orthopedic and dental implant-related infections. In this regard, two major research strategies are herein addressed, namely (i) AMP-releasing systems from titanium-modified surfaces and from bone cements or beads; and (ii) AMP immobilization strategies used to graft AMPs onto titanium or other model surfaces with potential translation as coatings. In overview, releasing strategies have evolved to guarantee higher loadings, prolonged and targeted delivery periods upon infection. In addition, avant-garde self-assembling strategies or polymer brushes allowed higher immobilized peptide surface densities, overcoming bioavailability issues. Future research efforts should focus on the regulatory demands for pre-clinical and clinical validation towards clinical translation.

Indexed as

antimicrobialantimicrobial-peptides (AMPs)orthopedic implant-related infectionspeptide immobilizationpeptide releasesurface functionalization

Identifiers

PMID34834333
PMCPMC8625235
OpenAlexW3212572154

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.