Cited by 185Plasma Applications and DiagnosticsMicrobial Inactivation MethodsPhotodynamic Therapy Research Studies

Potential cellular targets and antibacterial efficacy of atmospheric pressure non-thermal plasma

Alkawareek, Mahmoud Y., Gorman, Sean P., Graham, William G., Gilmore, Brendan F.·2014·International Journal of Antimicrobial Agents

Abstract

Atmospheric pressure non-thermal plasma (APNTP) has been gaining increasing interest as a new alternative antibacterial approach. Although this approach has demonstrated promising antibacterial activity, its exact mechanism of action remains unclear. Mechanistic elucidation of the antimicrobial activity will facilitate development and rational optimisation of this approach for potential medical applications. In this study, the antibacterial efficacy of an in-house-built APNTP jet was evaluated alongside an investigation of the interactions between APNTP and major cellular components in order to identify the potential cellular targets involved in plasma-mediated bacterial destruction mechanisms. The investigated plasma jet exhibited excellent, rapid antibacterial activity against a selected panel of clinically significant bacterial species including Bacillus cereus, meticillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA), Escherichia coli and Pseudomonas aeruginosa, all of which were completely inactivated within 2 min of plasma exposure. Plasma-mediated damaging effects were observed, to varying degrees, on all of the investigated cellular components including DNA, a model protein enzyme, and lipid membrane integrity and permeability. The antibacterial efficacy of APNTP appears to involve a multiple-target mechanism, which potentially reduces the likelihood of emergence of microbial resistance towards this promising antimicrobial approach. However, cellular membrane damage and resulting permeability perturbation was found to be the most likely rate-determining step in this mechanism.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.ijantimicag.2013.08.022

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Alkawareek, M. Y., Gorman, S. P., Graham, W. G., & Gilmore, B. F.
Affiliations
  • University of Jordan (JO)
  • Queen's University Belfast (GB)
Corresponding author
Gilmore, Brendan F.
Venue
International Journal of Antimicrobial Agents
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2014-02
Volume
43
Issue
2
Pages
154-160
ISSN
0924-8579 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2029631332
Cited by
185
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 12 · 2025: 12 · 2024: 18 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 18 · 2021: 15 · 2020: 23 · 2019: 18 · 2018: 16 · 2017: 17 · 2016: 14 · 2015: 10 · 2014: 4
FWCI
7.24
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • International Journal of Antimicrobial Agents (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Research Portal (Queen's University Belfast) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging › Plasma Applications and Diagnostics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Biotechnology › Microbial Inactivation Methods
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine › Photodynamic Therapy Research Studies
Keywords
non-thermal atmospheric pressure plasma, antibacterial mechanism, plasma jet, bacterial inactivation, membrane permeability, membrane damage, DNA damage, protein denaturation, methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, Escherichia coli, Bacillus cereus, antimicrobial resistance
MeSH terms
Anti-Bacterial Agents, Atmospheric Pressure, DNA, Gram-Negative Bacteria, Gram-Positive Bacteria, Time Factors, Plasma Gases

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review