Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42744869›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2026

Development and comparative evaluation of in vitro, ex vivo, and in vivo models for the assessment of broad-spectrum topical antimicrobial efficacy.

Faris S Alnezary, Masaad Saeed Almutairi

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

2 authors.

Faris S AlnezaryDepartment of Pharmacy Practice, College of Pharmacy, Taibah University, Madinah, 41477, Saudi Arabia.
Masaad Saeed AlmutairiDepartment of Pharmacy Practice, College of Pharmacy, Qassim University, Qassim, 51452, Saudi Arabia. mas.almutairi@qu.edu.sa.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The escalating prevalence of multidrug-resistant skin and soft tissue infections (SSTIs) undermines current decolonization strategies. While mupirocin remains the gold standard for MRSA, its inactivity against Pseudomonas aeruginosa creates a critical therapeutic gap in polymicrobial wounds. The development of effective alternatives is currently impeded by in vitro assays that fail to mimic the physical barriers of the wound microenvironment. To address these challenges, this study aimed to validate a comprehensive multi-tiered screening platform and evaluate the efficacy of a novel 5% ceftriaxone gel as a broad-spectrum alternative. We established a comprehensive, multi-tiered validation platform to assess a novel 5% ceftriaxone gel formulation. The pipeline included: (1) Agar Well Diffusion to quantify vehicle release kinetics; (2) a Gauze-Disk Biofilm Prevention assay to evaluate penetration through standard dressings; (3) an Ex Vivo Porcine Ear Skin model to challenge efficacy against the stratum corneum and wound lipids; and (4) an In Vivo Galleria mellonella model to assess the prevention of systemic lethality. The formulation was benchmarked against mupirocin, and triple antibiotic ointment. In diffusion assays, the 5% ceftriaxone gel exhibited broad-spectrum release, producing inhibition zones > 44 mm against staphylococci and a mean zone of 50.1 mm against P. aeruginosa. In the Gauze model, the formulation successfully permeated standard cotton dressings, achieving complete bacterial eradication (No Growth) across all tested strains, including P. aeruginosa, significantly outperforming positive controls (p < 0.001). Crucially, in the ex vivo porcine model, the gel maintained potent bioactivity despite the lipid barrier, yielding significant > log reductions at 24 h across all strains: MRSA (> 2.5-log), MSSA (> 3-log), S. pyogenes (> 4-log), and P. aeruginosa (> 4-log). Furthermore, topical application in the in vivo G. mellonella model significantly reduced the systemic bacterial burden across all pathogens (p < 0.05), validating trans-cuticular protective efficacy. This study evaluates a robust, ethical preclinical screening platform for topical antimicrobials. The findings suggest that a high-concentration ceftriaxone gel has the potential to address the "mupirocin gap" by providing broad-spectrum coverage against both resistant staphylococci and Pseudomonas in experimental models.

Indexed as

Anti-Bacterial AgentsCeftriaxoneAdministration, TopicalAnimalsBiofilmsDisease Models, AnimalMethicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureusMicrobial Sensitivity TestsPseudomonas aeruginosaSwineAnti-Bacterial AgentsCeftriaxoneBiofilm preventionCeftriaxoneEx vivo porcine skin modelGalleria mellonellaInfectious diseaseMethicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA)Mupirocin resistancePreclinical screeningPseudomonas aeruginosaSkin and soft tissue infections (SSTIs)Topical antimicrobial

Identifiers

PMID42744869
PMCPMC13578364

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.