ArticleUltrasonics sonochemistry2025
Remote biofilm dislodgment using focused acoustic vortex.
Article in Ultrasonics sonochemistry, 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.
- Fatty Acids as Prebiotics and Their Role in Antibiofilm Activity.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Biofilms constitute a major challenge in treating implant-associated and chronic infections due to their structural resilience and drug resistance, particularly as implant demand rises due to aging populations. Conventional methods are often invasive, complex, and costly, while focused ultrasound (FUS) poses risks related to biocompatibility and tissue damage. Distinguished by its helical phase structure and rotational energy distribution, focused acoustic vortex (FAV) theoretically generates stronger rotational forces and acoustic streaming than FUS under identical acoustic conditions. This study investigates the feasibility of FAV technique for biofilm removal. Biofilms in vitro model were established using Escherichia coli, and a 2-MHz custom-built ultrasound transducer was employed to generate either FAV or FUS. Results indicated that FAV activation generated a centripetal vortical flow with rapid rotation, which was adjustable via acoustic pressure and duty cycle. Conversely, FUS generated solely outward acoustic streaming, exhibiting a flow velocity 43.6 % lower than that of FAV. At 1.75 MPa, implementing a 10 % duty cycle and a 180 s treatment, FAV removed 97 % of the biofilm, whereas FUS removed only 7 %. To achieve a comparable removal rate (95.8 %), FUS required 4 MPa for 10 minutes. Streaming velocity (R
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.