ArticleThe Journal of infectious diseases2025
An Antimicrobial Blue Light Prototype Device Controls Infected Wounds in a Preclinical Porcine Model.
Article in The Journal of infectious diseases, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- The Use of Blue Light as an Antimicrobial Treatment Against Staphylococcus aureus: A Systematic Review.Lasers in surgery and medicine · 2026Pooled it
- Challenges and opportunities in next-generation LED therapeutic devices.Light, science & applications · 2025Review
- Article
- Effect of novel antimicrobial blue light-emitting optical fiber on vancomycin-resistantJournal of bone and joint infection · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
Abstract
We developed a translational prototype antimicrobial blue light (ABL) device for treating skin wounds with ABL. Partial-thickness surgical wounds were created in live swine (an animal whose skin is considered the most like human skin), then heavily contaminated and left untreated for 24 hours with methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA). ABL treatment stabilized and reduced MRSA infection by greater than 4 orders of magnitude (>99.99%; P < .0001) compared with untreated wounds in the same animal, after only 2 daily treatments. These data support further development of such devices for controlling infection in skin wounds. ABL, with or without concomitant administration of negative pressure, antimicrobials, or photosensitizers, could play an important role in modern wound care by reducing the amount, duration, and cost of antibiotics needed, helping reduce antimicrobial resistance. No such device for treating human cutaneous wounds currently exists. This deserves further development and study.
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.