ArticleProbiotics and antimicrobial proteins2022
In Vitro-In Vivo Correlation for the Antibacterial Effect of Lactiplantibacillus plantarum as a Topical Healer for Infected Burn Wound.
Article in Probiotics and antimicrobial proteins, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Probiotics in Nanotechnology-Driven Wound Healing: From Mechanistic Insight to Clinical Promise.Pharmaceutics · 2025Review
- Synergistic Inhibitory Effect of Honey andPathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- The Antimicrobial Effect of Various Single-Strain and Multi-Strain Probiotics, Dietary Supplements or Other Beneficial Microbes against Common Clinical Wound Pathogens.Microorganisms · 2022Article
- Probiotics, their action modality and the use of multi-omics in metamorphosis of commensal microbiota into target-based probiotics.Frontiers in nutrition · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Difficulties in delivering antimicrobial agents to wound areas and emersion of multiple drug resistant organisms (MDROs) have converted managing burn infections into a complicated task in medicine. Probiotics emerged not only as a probable solution for burn infections but also as an accelerator in the healing process. The probability of in vitro-in vivo correlation (IVIVC) in probiotic activity leads to lower costs in finding new therapeutic options. Simulated wound fluid (SWF) was used to evaluate the antibacterial function of Lactiplantibacillus plantarum in wounds. The growth parameters in SWF were evaluated using a logistic model to predict growth behavior in the wound area. In addition, probiotic antimicrobial activity and secretion of antibacterial substances in SWF were also studied. Data were used to select the initial dose and apply frequency for in vivo study. The wound models were infected by two main pathogens (Pseudomonas aeruginosa or Staphylococcus aureus). In vitro results showed less lag time associated with considerable acid production in SWF. In the following, secretion of antimicrobial substances and co-aggregation with pathogens became more important. The susceptibility of pathogens to these factors was different, and culture medium affected the yield of each factor involved in eliminating pathogens. Histological analysis and macroscopic examination of wounds revealed probiotics as effective as positive control or more. There were some differences in the antibacterial functions of probiotics in simulated and real wound environments. The in vitro effect of probiotics on removal of pathogens was not the same as the trend seen in vivo.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.