Trial reportExperimental dermatology2024
Bactogram: Spatial Analysis of Bacterial Colonisation in Epidermal Wounds.
Trial report in Experimental dermatology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05378997 (A Phase 1, Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Study in Healthy Male and Female Volunteers to Investigate the Safety, Tolerability, and Pharmacokinetics of Ascending Topical Doses of TCP-25 Applied to Epidermal Suction Blister Wounds and in Patients With Non-Healing Leg Ulcers and Patients With Dystrophic Epidermolysis Bullosa), which is not on this map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
A Phase 1, Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Study in Healthy Male and Female Volunteers to Investigate the Safety, Tolerability, and Pharmacokinetics of Ascending Topical Doses of TCP-25 Applied to Epidermal Suction Blister Wounds and in Patients With Non-Healing Leg Ulcers and Patients With Dystrophic Epidermolysis Bullosa
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Skin barrier damage and subsequent development of harmful microbiota contribute to conditions such as wound infections, atopic dermatitis and chronic wounds, which impact millions of people globally and pose a significant economic burden on healthcare systems. Established microbial sampling methods, such as swabs and tissue biopsies, provide limited information on the spatial distribution of bacteria. We here describe a new method that produces a visual map of the distribution of cultivable bacteria, denoted 'Bactogram', across the whole wound and surrounding skin, suitable for image-based quantification. As part of an exploratory endpoint in a clinical trial we applied the Bactogram method to 48 suction blister wounds in 24 healthy volunteers. Bacteria developed in all wounds, predominantly on the skin under the dressing and near wound edges. Two quantification methods, based on visual scoring and image analysis, demonstrated high inter-, and intra-rater agreement and were used to characterise bacterial re-colonisation during epidermal wound healing. We also demonstrated proof of concept that the method can be used with chromogenic agar to enable spatial identification of pathogenic bacterial species, such as Staphylococcus aureus. In conclusion, this study introduces a simple method for sampling bacteria over large areas and generating a bacterial map that can identify spatial variations in bacterial composition and abundance in skin and wound conditions. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT05378997.
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.