ArticleLasers in medical science2025
Inactivation of Staphylococcus aureus by antimicrobial photodynamic therapy using 1,9-Dimethyl-Methylene Blue: in vitro and in vivo studies.
Article in Lasers in medical science, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The efficiency of antibiotics in terms of their bacterial inhibition is well known. However, studies show that its overuse, underuse, and misuse induce antimicrobial resistance, promoting the need to work with alternative methods. In this sense, antimicrobial photodynamic therapy (aPDT) is a promising selective method demonstrating excellent response. This study aimed to evaluate the antimicrobial action promoted in Staphylococcus aureus using 1,9 dimethyl methylene blue dye (DMMB) combined with red LED (λ 630 ± 20 nm, CW, 125 mW, 12 J/ cm², 192 s) in planktonic culture and rats skin wounds contaminated with staphylococcal bacteria. The experimental in vitro and in vivo groups were Control, LED, DMMB, and LED + DMMB; after aPDT, the triplicate samples for each dilution were incubated for 24 h, and the number of bacteria was determined by counting the colony-forming units, and the logarithm (CFU/mL log). Based on in vitro data obtained, the LED + DMMB group, when compared to the Control, showed a reduction in microbial load of 99.943% (p < 0.0001), with decimal reduction (RD = 3). Whereas in vivo results, the same comparing groups demonstrated a reduction in microbial load, reaching 99.994% (RD = 4). In this research, the aPDT was a unique treatment, and it is possible to repeat it to obtain higher microbial reduction, providing an alternative therapeutic that can be clinically validated to combat infections caused by S. aureus.
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.