ArticleScientific reports2025
Development of a wireless bioelectronic actuator for wound healing in a porcine model.
Article in Scientific reports, 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.
- Numerical simulation of PDRN iontophoresis: comparison with passive diffusion and key parameter analysis.Drug delivery · 2026Article
- Accelerating Wound Healing Through Deep Reinforcement Learning: A Data-Driven Approach to Optimal Treatment.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
23 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Wireless bioelectronic actuators have been developed to deliver targeted treatments over multiple days while continuously monitoring delivery, thereby improving wound healing. Specifically, these devices can deliver charged biomolecules such as fluoxetine cations (Flx[Formula: see text]) and electric field (EF) in freely moving pigs. Treatments can be controlled and monitored in real time via WiFi, with options for both user-specified delivery rates and durations, as well as automated closed-loop (CL) control. The devices are engineered to handle various failure scenarios that may arise in dynamic, real-world experiments-such as communication or power interruptions-ensuring that valuable experimental data is collected with minimal disruption. The ion pump features eight drug reservoirs and channels arranged around a 20 mm diameter-wound, with a central ground electrode (0 V). When voltages above 0 V are applied to the outer channels, currents flow from the reservoirs and channels into the wound, delivering Flx[Formula: see text] and/or EF depending on the reservoir solution. The device records applied voltages and currents locally to a microSD card at a high sampling rate, while simultaneously transmitting real-time measurements via a local WiFi network to a wound healing algorithm running on a nearby laptop. CL control of current/delivery rate is performed by an onboard microcontroller unit (MCU) and current-source microchips, based on instructions received from the wound healing algorithm. A graphical user interface (GUI) provides intuitive user control and real-time data visualization, with support for multiple devices. In vivo studies over seven days showed that Flx[Formula: see text]-treated wounds had a trend toward lower M1/M2 macrophage ratio and greater re-epithelialization compared to controls (standard-of-care), demonstrating the actuator's potential to enhance wound healing.
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.