Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 194

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Comparative in vitro study on cytotoxicity, antimicrobial activity, and binding capacity for pathophysiological factors in chronic wounds of alginate and silver‐containing alginate

Wiegand, Cornelia, Heinze, Thomas, Hipler, Uta‐Christina·2009·Wound Repair and Regeneration

Abstract

Chronic wounds contain elevated levels of proteases, proinflammatory cytokines, and free radicals. The presence of bacteria further exaggerates the tissue‐damaging processes. For successful treatment, the wound dressing needs to manage wound exudates, create a moist environment, inhibit infection, bind pathophysiological factors that are detrimental to wound healing, and provide thermal isolation. Furthermore, it has to relieve pain, be easy to use, show no allergic potency, and not release toxic residues. The present study suggests a comprehensive in vitro approach to enable the assessment of wound dressings to support optimal conditions for wound healing. Three alginate‐based wound dressings: alginate alone, alginate containing ionic silver, and alginate with nanocrystalline silver, were tested for biocompatibility, antimicrobial activity, and influence on chronic wound parameters such as elastase, matrix metalloproteases‐2, tumor necrosis factor‐α, interleukin‐8, and free radical formation. Alginate was found to bind considerable amounts of elastase, reduce the concentration of proinflammatory cytokines and inhibit the formation of free radicals. Furthermore, alginate showed antibacterial activity and high biocompatibility. Incorporation of silver into alginate fibers increased antimicrobial activity and improved the binding affinity for elastase, matrix metalloproteases‐2, and the proinflammatory cytokines tested. Addition of silver also enhanced the antioxidant capacity. However, a distinct negative effect of silver‐containing alginates on human HaCaT keratinocytes was noted in vitro.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.1524-475x.2009.00503.x

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Show all 1 references

Cited by

See all 194

Metadata

Authors
Wiegand, C., Heinze, T., & Hipler, U.
Venue
Wound Repair and Regeneration
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2009-07
Volume
17
Issue
4
Pages
511-521
ISSN
  • 1067-1927 (ISSN-L)
  • 1524-475X
OpenAlex
W2066869553
Cited by
194
References
1
FWCI
7.59
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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: Comparative in vitro study on cytotoxicity, antimicrobial activity, and binding capacity for pathophysiological factors in chronic wounds of alginate and silver‐containing alginate. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1524-475x.2009.00503.x
The paper
Wiegand, C., Heinze, T., & Hipler, U. (2009). Comparative in vitro study on cytotoxicity, antimicrobial activity, and binding capacity for pathophysiological factors in chronic wounds of alginate and silver‐containing alginate. Wound Repair and Regeneration. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1524-475x.2009.00503.x

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.