ArticleFrontiers in microbiology2026
Comparative study on the wound healing effects of local versus systemic application of Polymyxin B in mice infected with multidrug-resistant
Article in Frontiers in microbiology, 2026. 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Wound infections caused by extensively drug-resistant Objective: This study aimed to investigate the efficacy differences of different PMB administration routes (topical, intravenous, and combined therapy) in treating XDR-PA wound infections in mice, providing experimental evidence for optimizing clinical treatment regimens. Methods: One hundred and twenty Kunming mice were randomly assigned to five groups ( Results: Compared to the untreated infected group, all administered treatment groups demonstrated therapeutic efficacy. The topical administration group exhibited the most pronounced wound healing promotion, it achieved the highest wound closure rate, fastest resolution of erythema and oedema, and optimal bacterial clearance efficiency. Additionally, it showed effective regulation of inflammatory response, and minimal histopathological damage. The intravenous administration group exhibited the next highest efficacy. The combination therapy group did not demonstrate synergistic effects superior to local monotherapy. Mice in the untreated infection group exhibited the slowest weight gain and delayed wound healing. Mice in the untreated infection group exhibited the slowest weight loss and delayed wound healing. Discussion Conclusion: Under the experimental conditions employed, topical application of PMB demonstrated superior efficacy to intravenous administration and combined therapy in treating wound infections in XDR-PA mice. Due to the equal total daily dose design (5 mg/kg for all treatment groups), the combination therapy group received a lower dose per route (2.5 mg/kg each) compared to the monotherapy groups (5 mg/kg via a single route). Therefore, no definitive conclusion can be drawn regarding potential synergistic or antagonistic effects of combination therapy based on this study design. This suggests that targeted local administration may represent a more effective and cost-efficient strategy for localized infections caused by resistant bacteria, which warrants further clinical translational research.
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.