ArticleMicrosystems & nanoengineering2026
A microfluidic hollow-fiber infection model (µHFIM): monitoring bacterial response to dynamic drug treatment with single-cell resolution.
Article in Microsystems & nanoengineering, 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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Antibiotic resistance is a growing global health threat. To improve our understanding of the mechanisms driving antibiotic resistance, suitable infection models are needed that also capture relevant drug dynamics. Here, we present a microfluidic hollow-fiber infection model that enables pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic studies under physiologically relevant conditions. The system simulates temporally antibiotic concentration gradients (pharmacokinetic module) and enables the long-term, high-resolution imaging of bacterial cells within a tissue-like hydrogel matrix in a flat growth chamber (pharmacodynamic module) with minimum sample and drug consumption. Using Escherichia coli quality control strains exposed to amoxicillin and amoxicillin-clavulanic acid, we show that treatment efficacy is not determined solely by the fraction of time above the minimum inhibitory concentration. Instead, dosing intervals and recovery phases between doses critically shape bacterial survival and killing. Prolonged dosing phases (>6 h) or shortened recovery periods enhance bacterial clearance, while specific dynamic regimens induce distinct phenotypic responses, including filamentous growth. In addition, the system supports analysis of clinical isolates via inline staining. By combining dynamic PK control, tissue-like hydrogel environments, and sustained high-resolution imaging, the µHFIM enables in vivo-like investigation of bacterial responses to antibiotic treatment. This system provides mechanistic insight into how dosing schedules govern efficacy and adaptation, which may help to optimize antibiotic treatment strategies in the future (bench to bedside translation).
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.