ArticlePloS one2025
RETRACTED: The effect of biosynthesized silver nanoparticles on Pseudomonas aeruginosa-infected dogs wounds.
Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It has been retracted, and should not be counted. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Silver Nanoparticles in Antibacterial Research: Mechanisms, Applications, and Emerging Perspectives.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Review
- Retraction: The effect of biosynthesized silver nanoparticles on Pseudomonas aeruginosa-infected dogs wounds.PloS one · 2026Article
- Deciphering the formation of biogenic nanoparticles and their protein corona: State-of-the-art and analytical challenges.Analytical and bioanalytical chemistry · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
- Retraction · 2026-06-23Concerns/Issues about Results and/or Conclusions · Duplication of/in Image · Euphemisms for Duplication · Investigation by Journal/Publisher · Objections by Author(s) · Original Data and/or Images not Provided and/or not Available ·
- Retracted
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Environmental factors such as lesion and bacterial infection risk affect wound healing. Many researchers are interested in silver nanoparticles (AgNPs) due to their anti-inflammatory, antibacterial, and wound-healing properties. This study compared AgNPs to Amikacin on dogs' P. aeruginosa-infected wounds. Sixteen dogs were divided into four groups of four and received costo-abdominal right-side full-thickness skin wounds. Thereafter, a bacterial suspension was administered to each wound bed. To assess wound infection, a complete bacterial load count was performed. Clinical wound healing assessments were done (healing rate (%), healing time (days), and comparisons between AgNPs and Amikacin were made to determine their antibacterial actions, as well as histological examination of the skin. Tribulus terrestris was used for the biosynthesis of AgNPs in this study. The AgNPs were characterized using UV-vis spectroscopy, SEM, XRD, EDS, AFM and zeta potential. AgNPs, AgNPs-Amikacin, Amikacin, or no treatment (control group) were topically administered to the wound bed. AgNPs cure wounds in 20 ± 1.64 days, while Amikacin takes 28 ± 1.75. In comparison to amikacin, AgNPs 18 ± 1.47 healed the fastest. AgNPs-Amikacin, AgNPs, and Amikacin can eradicate P. aeruginosa-infected wounds in 7, 9, and 14 days, according to bacterial counts. AgNPs reduce inflammation and increase collagen fiber deposition to treat skin lesions. AgNPs also reduced hemorrhagic areas and inflammatory cells in P. aeruginosa-infected wounds, aiding wound healing. All in all, these nanoparticles reduced bacterial wound infections and aided tissue healing. It has been found that AgNPs can be used as an efficacious antimicrobial and anti-inflammatory agent in wound healing instead of antibiotics.
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.