ArticlePloS one2025
Bacteriophage as an anti-biofilm agent against Pseudomonas aeruginosa from wound infection.
Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Modeling the Phage Properties Best for Therapy.Viruses · 2026Article
- Modeling the phage properties best for therapy.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Pseudomonas aeruginosa, an opportunistic pathogen associated with wound infections, resists many commonly available antibiotics. Its ability to form biofilm provides an additional trait to evade antibiotics. Biofilm-associated infections are difficult to treat, raising the need for alternative strategies. Thus, this research aimed to investigate the potential of bacteriophage to disrupt the biofilm produced by P. aeruginosa isolated from wound infections. Wound samples were collected aseptically, processed for the isolation of P. aeruginosa, and identified by standard microbiological methods. Antimicrobial susceptibility was determined by the Kirby-Bauer disc diffusion method. Bacteriophages were isolated using the double-layer agar method. Phenotypic assessment of biofilm formation by the isolates and its reduction by phages was conducted by the tissue culture plate assay. Out of 647 wound samples processed, 96 P. aeruginosa were isolated. Piperacillin/tazobactam was the most effective antibiotic, while doxycycline was the least effective. Among the total isolates, 86 (89.6%) were multidrug-resistant (MDR) and 69 (71.9%) were biofilm producers. Three different phages isolated from sewage demonstrated a high specificity to P. aeruginosa. Of these, phage vB_PaeP_PS2 lysed the highest number of isolates (22.9%), including 17 MDR and 21 biofilm-producing isolates. The biofilm reduction assay demonstrated that phage treatment significantly reduced biofilm formation, with vB_PaeP_PS2 achieving a 58% reduction after 6 h of treatment. In conclusion, this study highlights the high prevalence of biofilm-producing MDR P. aeruginosa in wound infections and, for the first time in Nepal, demonstrates the potential of locally isolated phages to lyse biofilm-forming MDR isolates and disrupt their biofilms.
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.