Cited by 127Wound Healing and TreatmentsBacterial biofilms and quorum sensingDiabetic Foot Ulcer Assessment and Management

Time course study of delayed wound healing in a biofilm-challenged diabetic mouse model

Open access
Zhao, Ge, Usui, Marcia L., Underwood, Robert A., Singh, Pradeep K., James, Garth A., Stewart, Philip S., Fleckman, Philip, Olerud, John E.·2012·Wound Repair and Regeneration

Abstract

Bacterial biofilm has been shown to play a role in delaying wound healing of chronic wounds, a major medical problem that results in significant health care burden. A reproducible animal model could be very valuable for studying the mechanism and management of chronic wounds. Our previous work showed that P seudomonas aeruginosa (PAO 1) biofilm challenge on wounds in diabetic (db/db) mice significantly delayed wound healing. In this wound time course study, we further characterize the bacterial burden, delayed wound healing, and certain aspects of the host inflammatory response in the PAO 1 biofilm‐challenged db/db mouse model. PAO 1 biofilms were transferred onto 2‐day‐old wounds created on the dorsal surface of db/db mice. Control wounds without biofilm challenge healed by 4 weeks, consistent with previous studies; none of the biofilm‐challenged wounds healed by 4 weeks. Of the biofilm‐challenged wounds, 64% healed by 6 weeks, and all of the biofilm‐challenged wounds healed by 8 weeks. During the wound‐healing process, P. aeruginosa was gradually cleared from the wounds while the presence of S taphylococcus aureus (part of the normal mouse skin flora) increased. Scabs from all unhealed wounds contained 10 7 P. aeruginosa, which was 100‐fold higher than the counts isolated from wound beds (i.e., 99% of the P. aeruginosa was in the scab). Histology and genetic analysis showed proliferative epidermis, deficient vascularization, and increased inflammatory cytokines. Hypoxia inducible factor expression increased threefold in 4‐week wounds. In summary, our study shows that biofilm‐challenged wounds typically heal in approximately 6 weeks, at least 2 weeks longer than nonbiofilm‐challenged normal wounds. These data suggest that this delayed wound healing model enables the in vivo study of bacterial biofilm responses to host defenses and the effects of biofilms on host wound healing pathways. It may also be used to test antibiofilm strategies for treating chronic wounds.

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.2012.00793.x

Cites

38 of 38 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

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?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Zhao, G., Usui, M. L., Underwood, R. A., Singh, P. K., James, G. A., Stewart, P. S., Fleckman, P., & Olerud, J. E.
Affiliations
  • University of Washington (US)
  • Montana State University (US)
Corresponding author
Zhao, Ge
Venue
Wound Repair and Regeneration
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2012-05
Volume
20
Issue
3
Pages
342-352
ISSN
  • 1067-1927 (ISSN-L)
  • 1524-475X
OpenAlex
W1503714410
Cited by
127
References
38
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 10 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 12 · 2022: 14 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 12 · 2019: 9 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 7 · 2016: 11 · 2015: 8 · 2014: 6 · 2013: 10
FWCI
8.12
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Wound Repair and Regeneration (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • Montana State University ScholarWorks (Montana State University) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health
  • National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (K24HL102246)
  • National Institute of General Medical Sciences (P20GM078445)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Rehabilitation › Wound Healing and Treatments
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Bacterial biofilms and quorum sensing
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetic Foot Ulcer Assessment and Management
Keywords
chronic wounds, bacterial biofilms, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, diabetic wound healing, db/db mice, Staphylococcus aureus, wound inflammation, hypoxia-inducible factor, vascularization, antibiofilm strategies
MeSH terms
Animals, Diabetes Mellitus, Experimental, Male, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, Pseudomonas Infections, Time Factors, Wound Healing, Mice, Inbred NOD, Biofilms, Mice

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