CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 178

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Biofilm and wound healing: from bench to bedside

Goswami, Aakansha Giri, Basu, Somprakas, Banerjee, Tuhina, Shukla, Vijay Kumar·2023·European Journal of Medical Research
DOI 10.1186/s40001-023-01121-7PMC PMC10127443
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

The bubbling community of microorganisms, consisting of diverse colonies encased in a self-produced protective matrix and playing an essential role in the persistence of infection and antimicrobial resistance, is often referred to as a biofilm. Although apparently indolent, the biofilm involves not only inanimate surfaces but also living tissue, making it truly ubiquitous. The mechanism of biofilm formation, its growth, and the development of resistance are ever-intriguing subjects and are yet to be completely deciphered. Although an abundance of studies in recent years has focused on the various ways to create potential anti-biofilm and antimicrobial therapeutics, a dearth of a clear standard of clinical practice remains, and therefore, there is essentially a need for translating laboratory research to novel bedside anti-biofilm strategies that can provide a better clinical outcome. Of significance, biofilm is responsible for faulty wound healing and wound chronicity. The experimental studies report the prevalence of biofilm in chronic wounds anywhere between 20 and 100%, which makes it a topic of significant concern in wound healing. The ongoing scientific endeavor to comprehensively understand the mechanism of biofilm interaction with wounds and generate standardized anti-biofilm measures which are reproducible in the clinical setting is the challenge of the hour. In this context of “more needs to be done”, we aim to explore various effective and clinically meaningful methods currently available for biofilm management and how these tools can be translated into safe clinical practice.

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 · 10.1186/s40001-023-01121-7

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Figures

Fig. 1 Biofilm-based wound care (BBWC): schema of workflow
Fig. 1 Biofilm-based wound care (BBWC): schema of workflowCC BY · PubMed Central

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

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.

Citations

Cites

Show all 2 references

Research works printed but not linked: 187

  1. Heukelekian H, Heller A. Relation between food concentration and surface for bacterial growth. J Bacteriol. 1940;40:547–58. · DOI
  2. Geesey GG, Richardson WT, Yeomans HG, Irvin RT, Costerton JW. Microscopic examination of natural sessile bacterial populations from an alpine stream. Can J Microbiol. 1977;23(12):1733–6. https://doi.org/10.1139/m77-249. · DOI
  3. Jones HC, Roth IL, Saunders WM III. Electron microscopic study of a slime layer. J Bacteriol. 1969;99:316–25. · DOI
  4. Characklis WG. Attached microbial growths-II Frictional resistance due to microbial slimes. Water Res. 1973;7:1249–58. · DOI
  5. Costerton JW, Geesey GG, Cheng KJ. How bacteria stick. Sci Am. 1978;238(1):86–95. https://doi.org/10.1038/scientificamerican0178-86. · DOI
  6. Socransky SS, Haffajee AD. Dental biofilms: difficult therapeutic targets. Periodontol. 2000;2002(28):12–55. https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-0757.2002.280102.x. · DOI · Paper page
  7. Tatakis DN, Kumar PS. Etiology and pathogenesis of periodontal diseases in periodontology: present status and future concepts. Dent Clin North Am. 2005;49:493–7. · DOI
  8. Processor JI. Quorum Sensing in biofilms. Dental Plaque revisited. In: Newman HN, Wilson M, editors. Cardiff: Bioline; 1999. pp. 79–88
  9. Percival SL, Hill KE, Williams DW, Hooper SJ, Thomas DW, Costerton JW. A review of the scientific evidence for biofilms in wounds. Wound Repair Regen. 2012;20(5):647–57. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1524-475X.2012.00836.x. · DOI
  10. Peyyala R, Ebersole JL. Multispecies biofilms and host responses: “discriminating the trees from the forest.” Cytokine. 2013;61(1):15–25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cyto.2012.10.006. · DOI
  11. Pathare NA, Bal A, Talvalkar GV, Antani DU. Diabetic foot infections: a study of microorganisms associated with the different Wagner grades. Indian J Pathol Microbiol. 1998;41(4):437–41.
  12. Patel S, Srivastava S, Singh MR, Singh D. Mechanistic insight into diabetic wounds: Pathogenesis, molecular targets and treatment strategies to pace wound healing. Biomed Pharmacother. 2019;112:108615. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biopha.2019.108615. · DOI
  13. Biswas S, et al. Hypoxia inducible microRNA 210 attenuates keratinocyte proliferation and impairs closure in a murine model of ischemic wounds. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2010;107:6976–81. · DOI · Paper page
  14. Chan YC, Roy S, Khanna S, Sen CK. Downregulation of endothelial microRNA-200b supports cutaneous wound angiogenesis by desilencing GATA binding protein 2 and vascular endothelial growth factor receptor 2. Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol. 2012;32:1372–82. · DOI · Paper page
  15. Dunyach-Remy C, Cadière A, Richard JL, et al. Polymerase chain reaction-denaturing gradient gel electrophoresis (PCR-DGGE): a promising tool to diagnose bacterial infections in diabetic foot ulcers. Diabetes Metab. 2014;40(6):476–80. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.diabet.2014.03.002. · DOI
  16. Gajula B, Munnamgi S, Basu S. How bacterial biofilms affect chronic wound healing: a narrative review. Int J Surg. 2020;3(2):e16. https://doi.org/10.1097/GH9.0000000000000016. · DOI
  17. Peleg AY, Weerarathna T, McCarthy JS, Davis TM. Common infections in diabetes: pathogenesis, management and relationship to glycaemic control. Diabetes Metab Res Rev. 2007;23(1):3–13. https://doi.org/10.1002/dmrr.682. · DOI · Paper page
  18. Singh K, Agrawal NK, Gupta SK, Mohan G, Chaturvedi S, Singh K. Decreased expression of heat shock proteins may lead to compromised wound healing in type 2 diabetes mellitus patients. J Diabetes Compl. 2015;29(4):578–88. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdiacomp.2015.01.007. · DOI
  19. Singh K, Agrawal NK, Gupta SK, Mohan G, Chaturvedi S, Singh K. Genetic and epigenetic alterations in Toll like receptor 2 and wound healing impairment in type 2 diabetes patients. J Diabetes Compl. 2015;29(2):222–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdiacomp.2014.11.015. · DOI
  20. Smith K, Collier A, Townsend EM, et al. One step closer to understanding the role of bacteria in diabetic foot ulcers: characterising the microbiome of ulcers. BMC Microbiol. 2016;16:54. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12866-016-0665-z. · DOI
  21. Rahim K, Saleha S, Zhu X, Huo L, Basit A, Franco OL. Bacterial contribution in chronicity of wounds. Microb Ecol. 2017;73(3):710–21. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00248-016-0867-9. · DOI
  22. Dowd SE, Wolcott RD, Sun Y, McKeehan T, Smith E, Rhoads D. Polymicrobial nature of chronic diabetic foot ulcer biofilm infections determined using bacterial tag encoded FLX amplicon pyrosequencing (bTEFAP). PLoS ONE. 2008;3(10):e3326. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0003326. · DOI · Paper page
  23. Redel H, Gao Z, Li H, et al. Quantitation and composition of cutaneous microbiota in diabetic and nondiabetic men. J Infect Dis. 2013;207(7):1105–14. https://doi.org/10.1093/infdis/jit005. · DOI
  24. Oates A, Bowling FL, Boulton AJ, McBain AJ. Molecular and culture-based assessment of the microbial diversity of diabetic chronic foot wounds and contralateral skin sites. J Clin Microbiol. 2012;50(7):2263–71. https://doi.org/10.1128/JCM.06599-11. · DOI
  25. Percival SL, Malone M, Mayer D, Salisbury AM, Schultz G. Role of anaerobes in polymicrobial communities and biofilms complicating diabetic foot ulcers. Int Wound J. 2018;15(5):776–82. https://doi.org/10.1111/iwj.12926. · DOI
  26. Banerjee T, Das A, Singh A, Bansal R, Basu S. The microflora of chronic diabetic foot ulcers based on culture and molecular examination: a descriptive study. Wound Manag Prev. 2019;65(5):16–23. https://doi.org/10.25270/wmp.2019.5.1623. · DOI
  27. Malone M, Johani K, Jensen SO, et al. Next generation DNA sequencing of tissues from infected diabetic foot ulcers. EBioMedicine. 2017;21:142–9. · DOI
  28. Johani K, Malone M, Jensen S, et al. Microscopy visualisation confirms multi-species biofilms are ubiquitous in diabetic foot ulcers. Int Wound J. 2017;14(6):1160–9. · DOI
  29. Charles PG, Uçkay I, Kressmann B, Emonet S, Lipsky BA. The role of anaerobes in diabetic foot infections. Anaerobe. 2015;34:8–13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anaerobe.2015.03.009. · DOI
  30. Basu S, Ramchuran Panray T, Bali Singh T, Gulati AK, Shukla VK. A prospective, descriptive study to identify the microbiological profile of chronic wounds in outpatients. Ostomy Wound Manage. 2009;55(1):14–20.
  31. Bowler PG, Duerden BI, Armstrong DG. Wound microbiology and associated approaches to wound management. Clin Microbiol Rev. 2001;14:244–69. · DOI · Paper page
  32. Kalan L, Loesche M, Hodkinson BP, Heilmann K, Ruthel G, Gardner SE, Grice EA. Redefining the chronic-wound microbiome: fungal communities are prevalent, dynamic, and associated with delayed healing. MBio. 2016;7:e01058-e1116. · DOI · Paper page
  33. Kalan L, Grice EA. Fungi in the wound microbiome. Adv Wound Care. 2018;7:247–55. · DOI
  34. White R, Cutting K, Kingsley A. Critical colonisation: clinical reality or myth? Wound UK. 2005;1:94–5.
  35. Bendy RH, Nuccio PA, Wolfe E, Collins B, Tamburro C, Glass W, Martin CM. Relationship of quantitative wound bacterial counts to healing of decubiti. Effect of topical gentamicin. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1964;4:147–55.
  36. Breidenbach WC, Trager S. Quantitative culture technique and infection in complex wounds of the extremities closed with free flaps. Plast Reconstr Surg. 1965;95:860–5. · DOI
  37. Robson MC, Heggers JP. Bacterial quantification of open wounds. Mil Med. 1969;134:19–24. · DOI
  38. Robson MC. Wound infection. A failure of wound healing caused by an imbalance of bacteria. Surg Clin North Am. 1997;77:637–50. · DOI · Paper page
  39. Burmølle M, Ren D, Bjarnsholt T, Sørensen SJ. Interactions in multispecies biofilms: do they actually matter? Trends Microbiol. 2014;22(2):84–91. · DOI
  40. Whiteley M, Bangera MG, Bumgarner RE, Parsek MR, Teitzel GM, Lory S, Greenberg EP. Gene expression in Pseudomonas aeruginosa biofilms. Nature. 2001;413:860–4. · DOI
  41. Boles BR, Thoendel M, Singh PK. Self-generated diversity produces ‘insurance effects’. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2004;101:16630–5. · DOI
  42. Marsh PD, Bowden GHW. Microbial community interactions in biofilms. In: Allison DG, Gilbert P, Lappin‐Scott HM, Wilson M, editors. Community structure and co‐operation in biofilms (Society for General Microbiology symposium no. 59), Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000:167–198. · DOI
  43. Marsh PD. Role of the oral microflora in health. Microb Ecol Health Dis. 2000;12:130–7.
  44. Sturme MH, Kleerebezem M, Nakayama J, Akkermans AD, Vaugha EE, De Vos WM. Cell to cell communication by autoinducing peptides in gram-positive bacteria. Antonie Van Leeuwenhoek. 2002;81:233–43. · DOI
  45. Guilhen C, Forestier C, Balestrino D. Biofilm dispersal: multiple elaborate strategies for dissemination of bacteria with unique properties. Mol Microbiol. 2017;105(2):188–210. https://doi.org/10.1111/mmi.13698. · DOI
  46. Liao C, Huang X, Wang Q, Yao D, Lu W. Virulence factors of Pseudomonas aeruginosa and antivirulence strategies to combat its drug resistance. Front Cell Infect Microbiol. 2022;12:926758. https://doi.org/10.3389/fcimb.2022.926758. · DOI
  47. Graf AC, Leonard A, Schäuble M, Rieckmann LM, Hoyer J, Maass S, Lalk M, Becher D, Pané-Farré J, Riedel K. Virulence Factors Produced by Staphylococcus aureus biofilms have a moonlighting function contributing to biofilm integrity. Mol Cell Proteomics. 2019;18(6):1036–53. https://doi.org/10.1074/mcp.RA118.001120. · DOI
  48. Sinha M, Ghosh N, Wijesinghe DS, Mathew-Steiner SS, Das A, Singh K, El Masry M, Khanna S, Inoue H, Yamazaki K, Kawada M, Gordillo GM, Roy S, Sen CK. Pseudomonas Aeruginosa theft biofilm require host lipids of cutaneous wound. Ann Surg. 2023;277(3):e634–47. https://doi.org/10.1097/SLA.0000000000005252. · DOI
  49. Pouget C, Dunyach-Remy C, Pantel A, Schuldiner S, Sotto A, Lavigne JP. Biofilms in diabetic foot ulcers: significance and clinical relevance. Microorganisms. 2020;8(10):1580. https://doi.org/10.3390/microorganisms8101580. · DOI
  50. Kalan LR, Meisel JS, Loesche MA, Horwinski J, Soaita I, Chen X, Uberoi A, Gardner SE, Grice EA. Strain- and species-level variation in the microbiome of diabetic wounds is associated with clinical outcomes and therapeutic efficacy. Cell Host Microbe. 2019;25(5):641-655.e5. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chom.2019.03.006. · DOI
  51. Lavigne JP, Sotto A, Dunyach-Remy C, Lipsky BA. New molecular techniques to study the skin microbiota of diabetic foot ulcers. Adv Wound Care (New Rochelle). 2015;4(1):38–49. https://doi.org/10.1089/wound.2014.0532. · DOI
  52. Ciofu O, Moser C, Jensen PØ, Høiby N. Tolerance and resistance of microbial biofilms. Nat Rev Microbiol. 2022;20(10):621–35. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41579-022-00682-4. · DOI
  53. De Beer D, Srinivasan R, Stewart PS. Direct measurement of chlorine penetration into biofilms during disinfection. Appl Environ Microbiol. 1994;60(12):4339–44. https://doi.org/10.1128/aem.60.12.4339-4344.1994. · DOI · Paper page
  54. Suci PA, Mittelman MW, Yu FP, Geesey GG. Investigation of ciprofloxacin penetration into Pseudomonas aeruginosa biofilms. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1994;38(9):2125–33. https://doi.org/10.1128/AAC.38.9.2125. · DOI
  55. Dunne WM Jr, Mason EO Jr, Kaplan SL. Diffusion of rifampin and vancomycin through a Staphylococcus epidermidis biofilm. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1993;37(12):2522–6. https://doi.org/10.1128/AAC.37.12.2522. · DOI
  56. Anderl JN, Franklin MJ, Stewart PS. Role of antibiotic penetration limitation in Klebsiella pneumoniae biofilm resistance to ampicillin and ciprofloxacin. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2000;44(7):1818–24. https://doi.org/10.1128/AAC.44.7.1818-1824.2000. · DOI · Paper page
  57. Brown MR, Allison DG, Gilbert P. Resistance of bacterial biofilms to antibiotics: a growth-rate related effect? J Antimicrob Chemother. 1988;22(6):777–80. https://doi.org/10.1093/jac/22.6.777. · DOI
  58. Evans DJ, et al. Susceptibility of Pseudomonas aeruginosa and Escherichia coli biofilms towards ciprofloxacin: effect of specific growth rate. J Antimicrob Chemother. 1991;27:177–84. · DOI
  59. Duguid IG, Evans E, Brown MR, Gilbert P. Growth-rate-independent killing by ciprofloxacin of biofilm-derived Staphylococcus epidermidis; evidence for cell-cycle dependency. J Antimicrob Chemother. 1992;30(6):791–802. · DOI
  60. Duguid IG, Evans E, Brown MR, Gilbert P. Effect of biofilm culture upon the susceptibility of Staphylococcus epidermidis to tobramycin. J Antimicrob Chemother. 1992;30(6):803–10. · DOI
  61. Brown MR, Barker J. Unexplored reservoirs of pathogenic bacteria: protozoa and biofilms. Trends Microbiol. 1999;7:46–50. · DOI
  62. Hengge-Aronis, R. Regulation of gene expression during entry into stationary phase. In Escherichia coli and Salmonella: Cellular and Molecular Biology (Neidhart, F.C. et al., eds),1996; 1497–1512, ASM Press
  63. Adams JL, McLean RJ. Impact of rpoS deletion on Escherichia coli biofilms. Appl Environ Microbiol. 1999;65(9):4285–7. https://doi.org/10.1128/AEM.65.9.4285-4287.1999. · DOI
  64. Davies DG, Parsek MR, Pearson JP, Iglewski BH, Costerton JW, Greenberg EP. The involvement of cell-to-cell signals in the development of a bacterial biofilm. Science. 1998;280(5361):295–8. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.280.5361.295. · DOI · Paper page
  65. Brooun A, Liu S, Lewis K. A dose-response study of antibiotic resistance in Pseudomonas aeruginosa biofilms. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2000;44(3):640–6. https://doi.org/10.1128/AAC.44.3.640-646.2000. · DOI
  66. Maira-Litran T, et al. An evaluation of the potential of the multiple antibiotic resistance operon (mar) and the multidrug efflux pump acrAB to moderate resistance towards ciprofloxacin in Escherichia coli biofilms. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2000;45:789–95. · DOI
  67. Jaffe A, et al. Role of porin proteins OmpF and OmpC in the permeation of β-lactams. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1982;22:942–8. · DOI
  68. Prigent-Combaret C, et al. Abiotic surface sensing and biofilm-dependent regulation of gene expression in Eschericia coli. J Bacteriol. 1999;181:5993–6002. · DOI
  69. Watters C, Fleming D, Bishop D, Rumbaugh KP. Host Responses to Biofilm. Prog Mol Biol Transl Sci. 2016;142:193–239. https://doi.org/10.1016/bs.pmbts.2016.05.007. · DOI
  70. Wolcott R, Dowd S. The role of biofilms: are we hitting the right target? Plast Reconstr Surg. 2011;127(Suppl 1):28S-35S. https://doi.org/10.1097/PRS.0b013e3181fca244. · DOI
  71. Bhattacharya M, Berends ETM, Chan R, Schwab E, Roy S, Sen CK, Torres VJ, Wozniak DJ. Staphylococcus aureus biofilms release leukocidins to elicit extracellular trap formation and evade neutrophil-mediated killing. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2018;115(28):7416–21. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1721949115. · DOI
  72. Percival SL, Vuotto C, Donelli G, Lipsky BA. Biofilms and Wounds: An identification algorithm and potential treatment options. Adv Wound Care. 2015;4(7):389–97. · DOI
  73. Liu Y, Zhang J, Ji Y. PCR-based approaches for the detection of clinical methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus. Open Microbiol J. 2016;10:45–56. · DOI
  74. Quainoo S, Coolen JPM, van Hijum SAFT, Huynen MA, Melchers WJG, van Schaik W, Wertheim HFL. Whole-genome sequencing of bacterial pathogens: the future of nosocomial outbreak analysis. Clin Microbiol Rev. 2017;30:1015–63. · DOI
  75. Lasa I, Penadés JR. Bap: a family of surface proteins involved in biofilm formation. Res Microbiol. 2006;157:99–107. · DOI
  76. Pan Y, Fisher T, Olk C, Inzana TJ. Detection of antibodies to the biofilm exopolysaccharide of Histophilus somni following infection in cattle by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. Clin Vaccine Immunol. 2014;21:1463–7. · DOI
  77. Nagler M, Insam H, Pietramellara G, Ascher-Jenull J. Extracellular DNA in natural environments: features, relevance and applications. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol. 2018;102:6343–56. · DOI
  78. Antypas H, Choong FX, Libberton B, Brauner A, Richter-Dahlfors A. Rapid diagnostic assay for detection of cellulose in urine as biomarker for biofilm-related urinary tract infections. NPJ Biofilms Microbiomes. 2018;4:26. · DOI
  79. Van Oudenhove L, Devreese B. A review on recent developments in mass spectrometry instrumentation and quantitative tools advancing bacterial proteomics. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol. 2013;97(11):4749–62. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00253-013-4897-7. · DOI
  80. Vaudel M, Sickmann A, Martens L. Introduction to opportunities and pitfalls in functional mass spectrometry based proteomics. Biochim Biophys Acta. 2014;1844(1Pt A):12–20. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bbapap.2013.06.019. · DOI
  81. Schlafer S, Meyer RL. Confocal microscopy imaging of the biofilm matrix. J Microbiol Methods. 2017;138:50–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mimet.2016.03.002. · DOI
  82. Jansen B, Kohnen W. Prevention of biofilm formation by polymer modification. J Ind Microbiol. 1995;15:391–6. · DOI
  83. Crick CR, Ismail S, Pratten J, Parkin IP. An investigation into bacterial attachment to an elastomeric superhydrophobic surface prepared via aerosol assisted deposition. Thin Solid Films. 2011;519:3722–7. · DOI
  84. Privett BJ, Youn J, Hong SA, et al. Antibacterial fluorinated silica colloid superhydrophobic surfaces. Langmuir. 2011;27:9597–601. · DOI
  85. Perez-Giraldo C, Rodriguez-Benito A, Moran FJ, Hurtado C, Blanco MT, Gomez-Garcia AC. Influence of N-acetylcysteine on the formation of biofilm by ‘Staphylococcus epidermidis’. J Antimicrob Chemother. 1997;39:643–6. · DOI
  86. Romling U, Balsalobre C. Biofilm infections, their resilience to therapy and innovative treatment strategies. J Intern Med. 2012;272:541–61. · DOI
  87. Besinis A, Hadi SD, Le HR, Tredwin C, Handy RD. Antibacterial activity and biofilm inhibition by surface modified titanium alloy medical implants following application of silver, titanium dioxide and hydroxyapatite nanocoatings. Nanotoxicology. 2017;11:327–38. · DOI
  88. Shahverdi AR, Fakhimi A, Shahverdi HR, Minaian S. Synthesis and effect of silver nanoparticles on the antibacterial activity of different antibiotics against Staphylococcus aureus and Escherichia coli. Nanomedicine. 2007;3:168–71. · DOI
  89. Brackman G, Coenye T. Quorum sensing inhibitors as anti-biofilm agents. Curr Pharm Des. 2015;21:5–11. · DOI
  90. Hentzer M, Wu H, Andersen JB, et al. Attenuation of Pseudomonas aeruginosa virulence by quorum sensing inhibitors. EMBO J. 2003;22:3803–15. · DOI
  91. Subhadra B, Kim DH, Woo K, Surendran S, Choi CH. Control of biofilm formation in healthcare: Recent advances exploiting quorum-sensing interference strategies and multidrug efflux pump inhibitors. Materials. 2018;11:E1676. · DOI
  92. Ciulla M, Di Stefano A, Marinelli L, Cacciatore I, Di Biase G. RNAIII Inhibiting Peptide (RIP) and Derivatives as Potential Tools for the Treatment of S. aureus biofilm infections. Curr Top Med Chem. 2018;18(24):2068–79. https://doi.org/10.2174/1568026618666181022120711. · DOI
  93. Pinto RM, Soares FA, Reis S, Nunes C, Van Dijck P. Innovative strategies toward the disassembly of the eps matrix in bacterial biofilms. Front Microbiol. 2020;26(11):952. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2020.00952.PMID:32528433;PMCID:PMC7264105. · DOI
  94. Kim MH. Nanoparticle-Based Therapies for Wound Biofilm Infection: Opportunities and Challenges. IEEE Trans Nanobioscience. 2016;15(3):294–304. https://doi.org/10.1109/TNB.2016.2527600. · DOI
  95. Moreno MG, Lombardi L, Di Luca M. Antimicrobial peptides for the control of biofilm formation. Curr Top Med Chem. 2017. Epub ahead of print. PMID: 28056743.
  96. Wei J, Cao X, Qian J, Liu Z, Wang X, Su Q, Wang Y, Xie R, Li X. Evaluation of antimicrobial peptide LL-37 for treatment of Staphylococcus aureus biofilm on titanium plate. Medicine (Baltimore). 2021;100(44):e27426. https://doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000027426. · DOI
  97. Frolov N, Detusheva E, Fursova N, Ostashevskaya I, Vereshchagin A. Microbiological evaluation of novel bis-quaternary ammonium compounds: clinical strains, biofilms, and resistance study. Pharmaceuticals (Basel). 2022;15(5):514. https://doi.org/10.3390/ph15050514. · DOI
  98. Board-Davies EL, Rhys-Williams W, Hynes D, Williams D, Farnell DJJ, Love W. Antibacterial and antibiofilm potency of XF drugs, impact of photodynamic activation and synergy with antibiotics. Front Cell Infect Microbiol. 2022;12:904465. https://doi.org/10.3389/fcimb.2022.904465. · DOI
  99. Obłąk E, Futoma-Kołoch B, Wieczyńska A. Biological activity of quaternary ammonium salts and resistance of microorganisms to these compounds. World J Microbiol Biotechnol. 2021;37(2):22. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11274-020-02978-0. (PMID: 33428020). · DOI
  100. Yoon BK, Jackman JA, Valle-González ER, Cho NJ. Antibacterial free fatty acids and monoglycerides: biological activities, experimental testing, and therapeutic applications. Int J Mol Sci. 2018;19(4):1114. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms19041114.PMID:29642500;PMCID:PMC5979495. · DOI · Paper page
  101. Van Gent ME, Ali M, Nibbering PH, Kłodzińska SN. Current advances in lipid and polymeric antimicrobial peptide delivery systems and coatings for the prevention and treatment of bacterial infections. Pharmaceutics. 2021;13(11):1840. https://doi.org/10.3390/pharmaceutics13111840. · DOI
  102. Basu S, Agarwal M, Kumar Bhartiya S, Nath G, Kumar SV. An In vivo wound model utilizing bacteriophage therapy of Pseudomonas aeruginosa biofilms. Ostomy Wound Manage. 2015;61(8):16–23.
  103. Tian F, Li J, Nazir A, Tong Y. Bacteriophage - a promising alternative measure for bacterial biofilm control. Infect Drug Resist. 2021;20(14):205–17. https://doi.org/10.2147/IDR.S290093. · DOI
  104. Chang C, Yu X, Guo W, Guo C, Guo X, Li Q, Zhu Y. Bacteriophage-mediated control of biofilm: a promising new dawn for the future. Front Microbiol. 2022;13:825828. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2022.825828. · DOI
  105. Mishra R, Panda AK, De Mandal S, Shakeel M, Bisht SS, Khan J. Natural anti-biofilm agents: strategies to control biofilm-forming pathogens. Front Microbiol. 2020;11:566325. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2020.566325. · DOI
  106. Alam K, Farraj DAA, Mah-E-Fatima S, Yameen MA, Elshikh MS, Alkufeidy RM, Mustafa AEMA, Bhasme P, Alshammari MK, Alkubaisi NA, Abbasi AM, Naqvi TA. Anti-biofilm activity of plant derived extracts against infectious pathogen-Pseudomonas aeruginosa PAO1. J Infect Public Health. 2020;13(11):1734–41. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jiph.2020.07.007. (Epub 2020 Aug 2 PMID: 32753311). · DOI
  107. Kot B, Sytykiewicz H, Sprawka I, Witeska M. Effect of manuka honey on biofilm-associated genes expression during methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus biofilm formation. Sci Rep. 2020;10(1):13552. · DOI
  108. Shariati A, Didehdar M, Razavi S, Heidary M, Soroush F, Chegini Z. Natural compounds: a hopeful promise as an antibiofilm agent against candida species. Front Pharmacol. 2022;13:917787. https://doi.org/10.3389/fphar.2022.917787. · DOI
  109. Antonoplis A, Zang X, Huttner MA, Chong KKL, Lee YB, Co JY, Amieva MR, Kline KA, Wender PA, Cegelski L. A dual-function antibiotic-transporter conjugate exhibits superior activity in sterilizing MRSA Biofilms and Killing Persister Cells. J Am Chem Soc. 2018;140(47):16140–51. https://doi.org/10.1021/jacs.8b08711. · DOI
  110. Schmidt NW, Agak GW, Deshayes S, Yu Y, Blacker A, Champer J, Xian W, Kasko AM, Kim J, Wong GCL. Pentobra: a potent antibiotic with multiple layers of selective antimicrobial mechanisms against propionibacterium acnes. J Invest Dermatol. 2015;135(6):1581–9. https://doi.org/10.1038/jid.2015.40. · DOI
  111. Bi Y, Xia G, Shi C, Wan J, Liu L, Chen Y, Yueming Wu, Zhang W, Zhou M, He H, Liu R. Therapeutic strategies against bacterial biofilms. Fund Res. 2021;1(2):193–212.
  112. Sultana ST, Babauta JT, Beyenal H. Electrochemical biofilm control: a review. Biofouling. 2015;31(9–10):745–58. https://doi.org/10.1080/08927014.2015.1105222. · DOI
  113. Hrynyshyn A, Simões M, Borges A. Biofilms in surgical site infections: recent advances and novel prevention and eradication strategies. Antibiotics. 2022;11(1):69. https://doi.org/10.3390/antibiotics11010069. · DOI
  114. Alves DR, Booth SP, Scavone P, et al. Development of a high-throughput ex-vivo burn wound model using porcine skin, and its application to evaluate new approaches to control wound infection. Front Cell Infect Microbiol. 2018;8:196. https://doi.org/10.3389/fcimb.2018.00196. · DOI
  115. Gupta P, Singh HS, Shukla VK, Nath G, Bhartiya SK. Bacteriophage therapy of chronic nonhealing wound: clinical study. Int J Low Extrem Wounds. 2019;18(2):171–5. https://doi.org/10.1177/1534734619835115. · DOI
  116. Kostenko V, Lyczak J, Turner K, Martinuzzi RJ. Impact of silver-containing wound dressings on bacterial biofilm viability and susceptibility to antibiotics during prolonged treatment. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2010;54:5120–31. https://doi.org/10.1128/AAC.00825-10. · DOI
  117. Kalishwaralal K, BarathManiKanth S, Pandian SRK, Deepak V, Gurunathan S. Silver nanoparticles impede the biofilm formation by Pseudomonas aeruginosa and Staphylococcus epidermidis. Colloids Surfa B Biointerfaces. 2010;79:340–4. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.colsurfb.2010.04.014. · DOI
  118. Memar MY, Ghotaslou R, Samiei M, Adibkia K. Antimicrobial use of reactive oxygen therapy: current insights. Infect Drug Resist. 2018;11:567–76. https://doi.org/10.2147/IDR.S142397. · DOI
  119. Percival SL, Francolini I, Donelli G. Low-level laser therapy as an antimicrobial and antibiofilm technology and its relevance to wound healing. Future Microbiol. 2015;10:255–72. https://doi.org/10.2217/fmb.14.109. · DOI
  120. Halstead FD, Thwaite JE, Burt R, et al. Antibacterial activity of blue light against nosocomial wound pathogens growing planktonically and as mature biofilms. Appl Environ Microbiol. 2016;82(13):4006–16. https://doi.org/10.1128/AEM.00756-16. · DOI
  121. Xiao Y, Zou H, Li J, Song T, Lv W, Wang W, Wang Z, Tao S. Impact of quorum sensing signaling molecules in gram-negative bacteria on host cells: current understanding and future perspectives. Gut Microbes. 2022;14(1):2039048. https://doi.org/10.1080/19490976.2022.2039048. · DOI
  122. Ammons MC. Anti-biofilm strategies and the need for innovations in wound care. Recent Pat Antiinfect Drug Discov. 2010;5(1):10–7. · DOI
  123. Caplin JD, García AJ. Implantable antimicrobial biomaterials for local drug delivery in bone infection models. Acta Biomater. 2019;15(93):2–11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actbio.2019.01.015. · DOI
  124. Wang H, Chu W, Ye C, Gaeta B, Tao H, Wang M, Qiu Z, Wang M. Chlorogenic acid attenuates virulence factors and pathogenicity of Pseudomonas aeruginosa by regulating quorum sensing. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol. 2018;103:903–15. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00253-018-9482-7.). · DOI
  125. Dell’Acqua G, Giacometti A, Cirioni O, Ghiselli R, Saba V, Scalise G, Gov Y, Balaban N. Suppression of drug-resistant staphylococcal infections by the quorum-sensing inhibitor RNAIII-Inhibiting Peptide. J Infect Dis. 2004;190:318–20. https://doi.org/10.1086/386546. · DOI
  126. Baldassarre L, Fornasari E, Cornacchia C, Cirioni O, Silvestri C, Castelli P, Giocometti A, Cacciatore I. Discovery of novel RIP derivatives by alanine scanning for the treatment of S. aureus infections. Med Chem Commun. 2013;4:1114. https://doi.org/10.1039/c3md00122a. · DOI
  127. Simonetti O, Cirioni O, Cacciatore I, Baldassarre L, Orlando F, Pierpaoli E, Lucarini G, Orsetti E, Provinciali M, Fornasari E, et al. Efficacy of the Quorum Sensing Inhibitor FS10 Alone and in Combination with Tigecycline in an Animal Model of Staphylococcal Infected Wound. PLoS ONE. 2016;11:e0151956. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0151956. · DOI
  128. Fong J, Mortensen KT, Nørskov A, Qvortrup K, Yang L, Tan CH, Nielsen TE, Givskov M. Itaconimides as Novel Quorum Sensing Inhibitors of Pseudomonas aeruginosa. Front Cell Infect Microbiol. 2019;8:443. https://doi.org/10.3389/fcimb.2018.00443. · DOI
  129. Zhang Y, Sass A, Van Acker H, Wille J, Verhasselt B, Van Nieuwerburgh F, Kaever V, Crabbé A, Coenye T. Coumarin reduces virulence and biofilm formation in Pseudomonas aeruginosa by affecting quorum sensing, type III secretion and C-di-GMP levels. Front Microbiol. 2018. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2018.01952. · DOI
  130. Sun F, Qu F, Ling Y, Mao P, Xia P, Chen H, Zhou D. Biofilm-associated infections: antibiotic resistance and novel therapeutic strategies. Future Microbiol. 2013;8:877–86. https://doi.org/10.2217/fmb.13.58. · DOI
  131. Tetz GV, Artemenko NK, Tetz VV. Effect of DNase and antibiotics on biofilm characteristics. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2009;53:1204–9. https://doi.org/10.1128/AAC.00471-08. · DOI
  132. Kalpana BJ, Aarthy S, Pandian SK. Antibiofilm activity of α-amylase from Bacillus subtilis S8–18 against biofilm forming human bacterial pathogens. Appl Biochem Biotechnol. 2012;167(6):1778–94. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12010-011-9526-2. · DOI
  133. Dai C, Lin J, Li H, Shen Z, Wang Y, Velkov T, Shen J. The Natural product curcumin as an antibacterial agent: current achievements and problems. Antioxidants. 2022;11(3):459. https://doi.org/10.3390/antiox11030459. · DOI
  134. Luo Y, Yang Q, Zhang D, Yan W. Mechanisms and control strategies of antibiotic resistance in pathological biofilms. J Microbiol Biotechnol. 2021;31(1):1–7. https://doi.org/10.4014/jmb.2010.10021. · DOI
  135. Huan Y, Kong Q, Mou H, Yi H. Antimicrobial peptides: classification, design, application and research progress in multiple fields. Front Microbiol. 2020;11:582779. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2020.582779. · DOI
  136. Torres MDT, Sothiselvam S, Lu TK, de la Fuente-Nunez C. Peptide design principles for antimicrobial applications. J Mol Biol. 2019;431(18):3547–67. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmb.2018.12.015. · DOI
  137. Roberts G, Hammad L, Creevy J, Shearman C, Mani R. Physical changes in dermal tissues around chronic venous ulcers. In: Proceedings of the 7th European Conference on Advances in Wound Management; 1997 Nov 18–20. Harrogate: European Wound Management Association, 1997:104–5.
  138. Leveen H, Falk G, Borek B, Diaz C, Lynfield Y, Wynkoop B, et al. Chemical acidification of wounds An adjuvant to healing and the unfavourable action of alkalinity and ammonia. Ann Surg. 1973;178:745–50. · DOI
  139. Kaufman T, Eichenlaub EH, Angel MF, Levin M, Futrell JW. Topical acidification promotes healing of experimental deep partial thickness skin burns: a randomised double-blind preliminary study. Burns. 1985;12:84–90. · DOI
  140. LuTheryn G, Glynne-Jones P, Webb JS, Carugo D. Ultrasound-mediated therapies for the treatment of biofilms in chronic wounds: a review of present knowledge. Microb Biotechnol. 2020;13(3):613–28. https://doi.org/10.1111/1751-7915.13471. · DOI
  141. Kvich L, Christensen MH, Pierchala MK, Astafiev K, Lou-Moeller R, Bjarnsholt T. The Combination of Low-Frequency Ultrasound and Antibiotics Improves the Killing of In Vitro Staphylococcus aureus and Pseudomonas aeruginosa Biofilms. Antibiotics (Basel). 2022;11(11):1494. https://doi.org/10.3390/antibiotics11111494. · DOI
  142. Hou Y, Yang M, Jiang H, Li D, Du Y. Effects of low-intensity and low-frequency ultrasound combined with tobramycin on biofilms of extended-spectrum beta-lactamases (ESBLs) Escherichia coli. FEMS Microbiol Lett. 2019;366(3):026. https://doi.org/10.1093/femsle/fnz026. · DOI
  143. Agrawal KS, Sarda AV, Shrotriya R, Bachhav M, Puri V, Nataraj G. Acetic acid dressings: Finding the Holy Grail for infected wound management. Indian J Plast Surg. 2017;50(3):273–80. https://doi.org/10.4103/ijps.IJPS_245_16. · DOI
  144. Banerjee J, Das-Ghatak P, Roy S, et al. Silver-zinc redox-coupled electroceutical wound dressing disrupts bacterial biofilm. PLoS ONE. 2015;10(3):e0119531. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0119531. · DOI
  145. Barki KG, Das A, Dixith S, Ghatak PD, Mathew-Steiner S, Schwab E, Khanna S, Wozniak DJ, Roy S, Sen CK. Electric field based dressing disrupts mixed-species bacterial biofilm infection and restores functional wound healing. Ann Surg. 2019;269(4):756–66. https://doi.org/10.1097/SLA.0000000000002504. · DOI
  146. Madhusudhan VL. Efficacy of 1% acetic acid in the treatment of chronic wounds infected with Pseudomonas aeruginosa: prospective randomised controlled clinical trial. Int Wound J. 2016;13(6):1129–36. https://doi.org/10.1111/iwj.12428. · DOI
  147. Wilson M, Henry M, Quill R, Byrne P. The pH of varicose ulcer surfaces and its relationship to healing. VASA. 1979;8:339–42.
  148. Romanelli M, Schipani E, Piaggesi A, Barachini P. Evaluation of surface pH on venous leg ulcers under Allevyn dressings. London: The Royal Society of Medicine Press; 1997.
  149. Normandin S, Safran T, Winocour S, et al. Negative pressure wound therapy: mechanism of action and clinical applications. Semin Plast Surg. 2021;35(3):164–70. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0041-1731792. · DOI
  150. Ludolph I, Fried FW, Kneppe K, Arkudas A, Schmitz M, Horch RE. Negative pressure wound treatment with computer-controlled irrigation/instillation decreases bacterial load in contaminated wounds and facilitates wound closure. Int Wound J. 2018;15:978–84. https://doi.org/10.1111/iwj.12958. · DOI
  151. Lam G, Fontaine R, Ross FL, Chiu ES. Hyperbaric oxygen therapy. Adv Skin Wound Care. 2017;30:181–90. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.ASW.0000513089.75457.22. · DOI
  152. Sanford NE, Wilkinson JE, Nguyen H, Diaz G, Wolcott R. Efficacy of hyperbaric oxygen therapy in bacterial biofilm eradication. J Wound Care. 2018;27(Sup1):S20–8. https://doi.org/10.12968/jowc.2018.27.Sup1.S20. · DOI
  153. Kolpen M, Lerche CJ, Kragh KN, Sams T, Koren K, Jensen AS, Line L, Bjarnsholt T, Ciofu O, Moser C, et al. Hyperbaric Oxygen Sensitizes Anoxic Pseudomonas aeruginosa Biofilm to Ciprofloxacin. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2017;61:e01024-e1117. https://doi.org/10.1128/AAC.01024-17. · DOI
  154. Gade PAV, Olsen TB, Jensen PØ, Kolpen M, Høiby N, Henneberg K-Å, Sams T. Modelling of ciprofloxacin killing enhanced by hyperbaric oxygen treatment in Pseudomonas aeruginosa PAO1 biofilms. PLoS ONE. 2018;13:e0198909. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0198909. · DOI
  155. Kant V, Gopal A, Kumar D, et al. Topical pluronic F-127 gel application enhances cutaneous wound healing in rats. Acta Histochem. 2014;116(1):5–13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acthis.2013.04.010. · DOI
  156. Das GP, Math SS, Pandey P, Roy S. OPEN A surfactant polymer dressing potentiates antimicrobial efficacy in biofilm disruption. Sci Rep. 2018;8:873. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-018-19175-7. · DOI · Paper page
  157. Hunckler J, de Mel A. A current affair: electrotherapy in wound healing. J Multidiscip Healthc. 2017;20(10):179–94. https://doi.org/10.2147/JMDH.S127207.PMID:28461755;PMCID:PMC5404801. · DOI
  158. Thakral G, Lafontaine J, Najafi B, Talal TK, Kim P, Lavery LA. Electrical stimulation to accelerate wound healing. Diabet Foot Ankle. 2013. https://doi.org/10.3402/dfa.v4i0.22081. · DOI
  159. Walencka E, Rózalska S, Sadowska B, et al. The influence of Lactobacillus acidophilus-derived surfactants on staphylococcal adhesion and biofilm formation. Folia Microbiol Praha. 2008;53(1):61–6. · DOI
  160. Sadowska B, Walencka E, Wieckowska-Szakiel M, Różalska B. Bacteria competing with the adhesion and biofilm formation by Staphylococcus aureus. Folia Microbiol (Praha). 2010;55(5):497–501. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12223-010-0082-x. · DOI
  161. Varma P, Nisha N, Dinesh KR, Kumar AV, Biswas R. Anti-infective properties of Lactobacillus fermentum against Staphylococcus aureus and Pseudomonas aeruginosa. J Mol Microbiol Biotechnol. 2011;20(3):137–43. https://doi.org/10.1159/000328512. · DOI
  162. Alcayaga-Miranda F, Cuenca J, Khoury M. Antimicrobial activity of mesenchymal stem cells: current status and new perspectives of antimicrobial peptide-based therapies. Front Immunol. 2017;8:339. https://doi.org/10.3389/fimmu.2017.0033. · DOI
  163. Johnson V, Webb T, Norman A, et al. Activated Mesenchymal Stem Cells Interact with Antibiotics and Host Innate Immune Responses to Control Chronic Bacterial Infections. Sci Rep. 2017;7(1):9575. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-017-08311-4. · DOI
  164. Wood CR, Al Dhahri D, Al Delfi I, et al. Human adipose tissue-derived mesenchymal stem/stromal cells adhere to and inhibit the growth of Staphylococcus aureus and Pseudomonas aeruginosa. J Med Microbiol. 2018;67(12):1789–95. https://doi.org/10.1099/jmm.0.00086. · DOI
  165. Schultz G, Bjarnsholt T, James GA, Leaper DJ, McBain AJ, Malone M, Stoodley P, Swanson T, Tachi M, Wolcott RD. Global Wound Biofilm Expert Panel Consensus guidelines for the identification and treatment of biofilms in chronic nonhealing wounds. Wound Repair Regen. 2017;25(5):744–57. https://doi.org/10.1111/wrr.12590. · DOI · Paper page
  166. Dowsett C. Biofilms: a practice-based approach to identification and treatment. Wounds UK. 2013;9(2):68–72.
  167. Cusumano CK, Pinkner J, Han Z, Greene SE, Ford B, Crowley JR, Henderson JP, Janetka JW, Hultgren S. Treatment and prevention of UTI with orally active mannoside FimH inhibitors. Sci Transl Med. 2011;3:109115. · DOI
  168. Chorell E, Pinkner JS, Phan G, Edvinsson S, Buelens F, Remaut H, Waksman G, Hultgren SJ, Almqvist F. Design and synthesis of C-2 substituted thiazolo and dihydrothiazolo ring-fused 2-pyridones: Pilicides with increased antivirulence activity. J Med Chem. 2010;53:5690–5. · DOI
  169. Cegelski L, Pinkner JS, Hammer ND, et al. Small-molecule inhibitors target Escherichia coli amyloid biogenesis and biofilm formation. Nat Chem Biol. 2009;5(12):913–9. https://doi.org/10.1038/nchembio.242. · DOI
  170. Finnegan S, Percival SL. EDTA: an antimicrobial and antibiofilm agent for use in wound care. Adv Wound Care (New Rochelle). 2015;4(7):415–21. https://doi.org/10.1089/wound.2014.0577. · DOI
  171. Cooper R, Jenkins L, Hooper S. Inhibition of biofilms of Pseudomonas aeruginosa by medihoney in vitro. J Wound Care. 2014;23(3):93–104. · DOI
  172. Wolcott R. Disrupting the biofilm matrix improves wound outcomes. J Wound Care. 2015;24(8):366–71. · DOI
  173. Ma Q, Zhang G, Wood TK. Escherichia coli BdcA controls biofilm dispersal in Pseudomonas aeruginosa and Rhizobium meliloti. BMC Res Notes. 2011;4:447. https://doi.org/10.1186/1756-0500-4-447. · DOI
  174. Ma Q, Yang Z, Pu M, Peti W, Wood TK. Engineering a novel c-di-GMP-binding protein for biofilm dispersal. Environ Microbiol. 2011;13(3):631–42. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1462-2920.2010.02368.x. · DOI
  175. Cava F, Lam H, de Pedro MA, Waldor MK. Emerging knowledge of regulatory roles of D-amino acids in bacteria. Cell Mol Life Sci. 2011;68(5):817–31. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00018-010-0571-8. · DOI · Paper page
  176. Kolodkin-Gal I, Cao S, Chai L, et al. A self-produced trigger for biofilm disassembly that targets exopolysaccharide [retracted in: Cell. 2015 May 7;161(4):946]. Cell. 2012;149(3):684–692. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2012.02.055 · DOI
  177. Thomas DC, Tsu CL, Nain RA, Arsat N, Fun SS, Sahid-Nik-Lah NA. The role of debridement in wound bed preparation in chronic wound: a narrative review. Ann Med Surg. 2021;71:102876. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amsu.2021.102876. · DOI
  178. Ramundo J, Gray M. Enzymatic wound debridement. J Wound Ostomy Continence Nurs. 2008;35(3):273–80. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.WON.0000319125.21854.78. · DOI
  179. Boakye YD, Osafo N, Danquah CA, Adu F, Agyare C. Antimicrobial Agents: Antibacterial Agents, Anti-biofilm Agents, Antibacterial Natural Compounds, and Antibacterial Chemicals. In: Kırmusaoğlu S, editor. Antimicrobials, Antibiotic Resistance, Antibiofilm Strategies and Activity Methods [Internet]. London: IntechOpen; 2019 [cited 2022 Oct 22]. https://www.intechopen.com/chapters/65644 doi: https://doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.82560 · DOI
  180. Ciofu O, Rojo-Molinero E, Macià MD, Oliver A. Antibiotic treatment of biofilm infections. APMIS. 2017;125(4):304–19. https://doi.org/10.1111/apm.12673. · DOI
  181. Malone M, Goeres DM, Gosbell I, Vickery K, Jensen S, Stoodley P. Approaches to biofilm-associated infections: the need for standardized and relevant biofilm methods for clinical applications. Expert Rev Anti Infect Ther. 2017;15(2):147–56. https://doi.org/10.1080/14787210.2017.1262257). · DOI
  182. Castaneda P, McLaren A, Tavaziva G, Overstreet D. Biofilm antimicrobial susceptibility increases with antimicrobial exposure time. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2016;474(7):1659–64. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11999-016-4700-z. · DOI
  183. Han A, Zenilman JM, Melendez JH, et al. The importance of a multifaceted approach to characterizing the microbial flora of chronic wounds. Wound Repair Regen. 2011;19:532–41. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1524-475X.2011.00720.x. · DOI
  184. Fromantin I, Damiene S, Florence R, et al. Occurrence and persistence of biofilms on cared chronic wounds: a large multicentric clinical study. Wound Med. 2018;23:28–34. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wndm.2018.09.008. · DOI
  185. Johani K, Malone M, Jensen S, et al. Microscopy visualisation confirms multi-species biofilms are ubiquitous in diabetic foot ulcers. Int Wound J. 2017;14:1160–9. https://doi.org/10.1111/iwj.12777. · DOI
  186. Vatan A, Saltoglu N, Yemisen M, et al. Association between biofilm and multi/extensive drug resistance in diabetic foot infection. Int J Clin Pract. 2018;72:e13060. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijcp.13060. · DOI
  187. Nakagami G, Schultz G, Gibson DJ, Phillips P, Kitamura A, Minematsu T, Miyagaki T, Hayashi A, Sasaki S, Sugama J, Sanada H. Biofilm detection by wound blotting can predict slough development in pressure ulcers: a prospective observational study. Wound Repair Regen. 2017;25(1):131–8. https://doi.org/10.1111/wrr.12505. · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 178

Metadata

Authors
Goswami, A. G., Basu, S., Banerjee, T., & Shukla, V. K.
Venue
European Journal of Medical Research
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Published
2023-04-25
Volume
28
Issue
1
ISSN
2047-783X
DOI
10.1186/s40001-023-01121-7
PMC
PMC10127443
Cited by
178
References
2
Language
en
Licence

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: Biofilm and wound healing: from bench to bedside. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1186/s40001-023-01121-7
The paper
Goswami, A. G., Basu, S., Banerjee, T., & Shukla, V. K. (2023). Biofilm and wound healing: from bench to bedside. European Journal of Medical Research. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40001-023-01121-7