The DOI matches its Crossref record; 19 of the 19 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Clinically Addressing Biofilm in Chronic Wounds
Open accessAbstract
BACKGROUND: A chronic wound is a wound that is arrested in the inflammatory phase of wound healing and cannot progress further. Over 90% of chronic wounds contain bacteria and fungi living within a biofilm construct. THE PROBLEM: Each aggregation of microbes creates a distinct biofilm with differing characteristics so that a clinical approach has to be tailored to the specifics of a given biofilm. Defining the characteristics of that biofilm and then designing a therapeutic option particular to that biofilm is currently being defined. BASIC/CLINICAL SCIENCE ADVANCES: Biofilm becomes resistant to therapeutic maneuvers at 48-96 h after formation. By repeatedly attacking it on a regular schedule, one forces biofilm to reattach and reform during which time it is susceptible to antibiotics and host defenses. Identifying the multiple bacteria and fungi that make up a specific biofilm using polymerase chain reaction (PCR) allows directed therapeutic maneuvers such as application of specific topical antibiotics and biocides to increase the effectiveness of the debridement. CLINICAL CARE RELEVANCE: Most chronic wounds contain biofilm that perpetuate the inflammatory phase of wound healing. Combining debridement with using PCR to identify the bacteria and fungi within the biofilm allows for more targeted therapeutic maneuvers to eliminate a given biofilm. CONCLUSION: Therapeutic options in addition to debridement are currently being evaluated to address biofilm. Using PCR to direct adjunctive therapeutic maneuvers may increase the effectiveness of addressing biofilm in a chronic wound.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
James, G. A., Swogger, E., Wolcott, R., Pulcini, E. D., Secor, P., Sestrich, J., Costerton, J. W., & Stewart, P. S. (2008) · Wound Repair and Regeneration · doi:10.1111/j.1524-475x.2007.00321.x · Cited by 1,543
Self-citationDowd, S. E., Sun, Y., Secor, P. R., Rhoads, D. D., Wolcott, B. M., James, G. A., & Wolcott, R. D. (2008) · BMC Microbiology · doi:10.1186/1471-2180-8-43 · Cited by 784
Self-citationSteed, D. L., Donohoe, D. J., Webster, M. W., & Lindsley, L. (1996) · PubMed · Cited by 574
Biofilm maturity studies indicate sharp debridement opens a time-dependent therapeutic window
Wolcott, R. D., Rumbaugh, K. P., James, G., Schultz, G., Phillips, P., Yang, Q., Watters, C., Stewart, P. S., & Dowd, S. E. (2010) · Journal of Wound Care · doi:10.12968/jowc.2010.19.8.77709 · Cited by 423
Self-citationMicroscopic and physiologic evidence for biofilm-associated wound colonization in vivo
Davis, S. C., Ricotti, C., Cazzaniga, A., Welsh, E., Eaglstein, W. H., & Mertz, P. M. (2008) · Wound Repair and Regeneration · doi:10.1111/j.1524-475x.2007.00303.x · Cited by 393
Rani, S. A., Pitts, B., Beyenal, H., Veluchamy, R. A., Lewandowski, Z., Davison, W. M., Buckingham-Meyer, K., & Stewart, P. S. (2007) · Journal of Bacteriology · doi:10.1128/jb.00107-07 · Cited by 340
Regular debridement is the main tool for maintaining a healthy wound bed in most chronic wounds
Wolcott, R. D., Kennedy, J. P., & Dowd, S. E. (2009) · Journal of Wound Care · doi:10.12968/jowc.2009.18.2.38743 · Cited by 218
Self-citationCardinal, M., Eisenbud, D. E., Armstrong, D. G., Zelen, C., Driver, V., Attinger, C., Phillips, T., & Harding, K. (2009) · Wound Repair and Regeneration · doi:10.1111/j.1524-475x.2009.00485.x · Cited by 211
Self-citationEpidermal stem cells: the cradle of epidermal determination, differentiation and wound healing
Morasso, M. I., & Tomic‐Canic, M. (2005) · Biology of the Cell · doi:10.1042/bc20040098 · Cited by 190
Piaggesi, A., Schipani, E., Campi, F., Romanelli, M., Baccetti, F., Arvia, C., & Navalesi, R. (1998) · Diabetic Medicine · doi:10.1002/(sici)1096-9136(199805)15:5<412::aid-dia584>3.0.co;2-1 · Cited by 181
Cited by
Implementing TIMERS: the race against hard-to-heal wounds
Atkin, L., Bućko, Z., Montero, E. C., Cutting, K., Moffatt, C., Probst, A., Romanelli, M., Schultz, G. S., & Tettelbach, W. (2019) · Journal of Wound Care · doi:10.12968/jowc.2019.28.sup3a.s1 · Cited by 369
Challenges in the management of chronic wound infections
Falcone, M., De Angelis, B., Pea, F., Scalise, A., Stefani, S., Tasinato, R., Zanetti, O., & Dalla Paola, L. (2021) · Journal of Global Antimicrobial Resistance · doi:10.1016/j.jgar.2021.05.010 · Cited by 339
Klebsiella pneumoniae Biofilms and Their Role in Disease Pathogenesis
Guerra, M. E. S., Destro, G., Vieira, B., Lima, A. S., Ferraz, L. F. C., Hakansson, A. P., Darrieux, M., & Converso, T. R. (2022) · Frontiers in Cellular and Infection Microbiology · doi:10.3389/fcimb.2022.877995 · Cited by 267
Boyajian, J. L., Ghebretatios, M., Schaly, S., Islam, P., & Prakash, S. (2021) · Nutrients · doi:10.3390/nu13124550 · Cited by 115
Metadata
- Authors
- Attinger, C., & Wolcott, R.
- Venue
- Advances in Wound Care
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2012-06
- Volume
- 1
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 127-132
- ISSN
- 2162-1918 (ISSN-L)
- 2162-1934
- OpenAlex
- W2014250987
- Cited by
- 269
- References
- 19
- FWCI
- 3.32
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Clinically Addressing Biofilm in Chronic Wounds. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1089/wound.2011.0333
- The paper
- Attinger, C., & Wolcott, R. (2012). Clinically Addressing Biofilm in Chronic Wounds. Advances in Wound Care. https://doi.org/10.1089/wound.2011.0333
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
