ArticleMilitary medicine2025
A Novel, Reverse-Phase-Shifting, Thermoreversible Foaming Hydrogel Containing Antibiotics for the Treatment of Traumatic Tissue Injuries in a Swine Model.
Article in Military medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
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
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionMore than one-third of patients with a combat injury evacuated to the United States have wound-related infections during their initial hospitalization, with prevention of such infections an ongoing battlefield challenge. Use of a reverse-phase-shifting thermoreversible foaming hydrogel containing vancomycin and tobramycin (HA) is one possible solution to this problem. MATERIALS AND
methodsThis study compared HA to the hydrogel vehicle without antibiotics (HV) and control (i.e., no intervention). Bilateral, 5 cm diameter, full-thickness wounds were created in 12 male swine (∼50 kg, Sus scrofa). These wounds were then inoculated with Staphylococcus aureus and Pseudomonas aeruginosa. Ten minutes after inoculation, the wounds were treated with HA, HV, or no intervention. This treatment was reapplied daily for a total of 7 days. Blood samples were drawn at baseline, 1 h after initial administration, and on days 1, 3, and 7. After 7 days, the animals were humanely euthanized and the wounds were swabbed or biopsied for microbiological analysis and culture. Full-thickness tissue specimens were subsequently collected for blinded histopathological evaluation of wound healing and bacterial growth.Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee and the U.S. Army's Animal Care and Use Review Office approvals were received prior to initiation of animal experiments.
resultsBacterial growth and histopathology analyses of cutaneous and skeletal muscle biopsies at the end of the study showed less severe and/or less frequent intralesional bacterial and neutrophilic inflammation in the HA group compared to the HV and control groups. The HV and control groups were comparable, showing no significant differences in treatment effects. Statistical significance was observed in reduced bacterial infiltration when comparing the HA group with both the control and HV groups. Neither vancomycin nor tobramycin was detected systemically in any plasma sample at all time points, with a lower limit of quantification of 50 ng/mL for both antibiotics.
conclusionHistopathology demonstrated significantly lower bacterial growth in the HA versus control (P = 1.4e-4) and HV (P = 3.2e-4) groups. It also showed statistically significant differences in other secondary outcomes for wound healing (e.g., neutrophilic infiltrate, fibroplasia, edema) between HA versus HV, as well as HA versus control, in both skin and muscle. In this porcine model of infected traumatic soft tissue injury, HA demonstrated significant benefits, and further research and development to explore its use in a range of settings is justified.
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.