Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41303157›Full record

ReviewJournal of clinical medicine2025

Microbial Biofilms as Barriers to Chronic Wound Healing: Diagnostic Challenges and Therapeutic Advances.

Yasir Almuhanna

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of clinical medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

15 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Polysaccharide based biomaterials for advanced wound healing applications.Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2026
    Review
  13. Review
  14. Biofilm-Responsive Nanoplatforms for Infected Wound Reconstruction.International journal of nanomedicine · 2026
    Review
  15. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Yasir AlmuhannaDepartment of Clinical Laboratory Science, College of Applied Medical Sciences, Shaqra University, Shaqra 11961, Saudi Arabia.ORCID 0000-0001-9080-6056

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Wound healing is a complex and multistage process that incorporates precise cellular and molecular coordination. The presence of biofilms in chronic wounds adversely affects the wound healing process, as it prolongs the closure of the wound, thus sustaining chronic inflammation. Current data suggest that biofilms are present in almost all chronic wounds, which leads to significant challenges in diagnosis and treatment. Traditional detection methods, such as cultures and light microscopy, often fail to detect biofilms; however, sophisticated molecular and imaging techniques are constrained by their expense and accessibility. Chronic wound management, therefore, has progressed from conventional antimicrobial application to integrated methodologies that incorporate biofilm debridement, antibiofilm dressing, negative pressure wound therapy, and innovative enzyme or nanoparticle interventions. This review highlights the clinical significance of biofilm presence as a barrier in chronic wound healing, assesses diagnostic and therapeutic innovations, and stresses the urgent need to improve patient outcomes.

Indexed as

biofilmchronicdiagnostichealingmicrobiomeresistancetherapeuticwound

Identifiers

PMID41303157
PMCPMC12653366

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.