The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Atmospheric Pressure Plasma: A High-Performance Tool for the Efficient Removal of Biofilms
Open accessAbstract
INTRODUCTION: The medical use of non-thermal physical plasmas is intensively investigated for sterilization and surface modification of biomedical materials. A further promising application is the removal or etching of organic substances, e.g., biofilms, from surfaces, because remnants of biofilms after conventional cleaning procedures are capable to entertain inflammatory processes in the adjacent tissues. In general, contamination of surfaces by micro-organisms is a major source of problems in health care. Especially biofilms are the most common type of microbial growth in the human body and therefore, the complete removal of pathogens is mandatory for the prevention of inflammatory infiltrate. Physical plasmas offer a huge potential to inactivate micro-organisms and to remove organic materials through plasma-generated highly reactive agents. METHOD: In this study a Candida albicans biofilm, formed on polystyrene (PS) wafers, as a prototypic biofilm was used to verify the etching capability of the atmospheric pressure plasma jet operating with two different process gases (argon and argon/oxygen mixture). The capability of plasma-assisted biofilm removal was assessed by microscopic imaging. RESULTS: The Candida albicans biofilm, with a thickness of 10 to 20 µm, was removed within 300 s plasma treatment when oxygen was added to the argon gas discharge, whereas argon plasma alone was practically not sufficient in biofilm removal. The impact of plasma etching on biofilms is localized due to the limited presence of reactive plasma species validated by optical emission spectroscopy.
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
Cited by
von Woedtke, T., Reuter, S., Masur, K., & Weltmann, K.-D. (2013) · Physics Reports · doi:10.1016/j.physrep.2013.05.005 · Cited by 848
Self-citationReuter, S., von Woedtke, T., & Weltmann, K.-D. (2018) · Journal of Physics D: Applied Physics · doi:10.1088/1361-6463/aab3ad · Cited by 522
Self-citationMicrobial Biofilms in the Food Industry—A Comprehensive Review
Carrascosa, C., Raheem, D., Ramos, F., Saraiva, A., & Raposo, A. (2021) · International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health · doi:10.3390/ijerph18042014 · Cited by 459
Reactive Oxygen Species-Inducing Antifungal Agents and Their Activity Against Fungal Biofilms
Delattin, N., Cammue, B. P., & Thevissen, K. (2014) · Future Medicinal Chemistry · doi:10.4155/fmc.13.189 · Cited by 189
Mountcastle, S. E., Vyas, N., Villapun, V. M., Cox, S. C., Jabbari, S., Sammons, R. L., Shelton, R. M., Walmsley, A. D., & Kuehne, S. A. (2021) · npj Biofilms and Microbiomes · doi:10.1038/s41522-021-00214-7 · Cited by 130
Metadata
- Authors
- Fricke, K., Koban, I., Tresp, H., Jablonowski, L., Schröder, K., Kramer, A., Weltmann, K.-D., von Woedtke, T., & Kocher, T.
- Venue
- PLoS ONE
- Publisher
- Public Library of Science (PLoS)
- Published
- 2012-08-06
- Volume
- 7
- Issue
- 8
- Pages
- e42539
- ISSN
- 1932-6203 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W1965423468
- Cited by
- 185
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 8.68
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
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: Atmospheric Pressure Plasma: A High-Performance Tool for the Efficient Removal of Biofilms. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1371/journal.pone.0042539
- The paper
- Fricke, K., Koban, I., Tresp, H., Jablonowski, L., Schröder, K., Kramer, A., Weltmann, K.-D., von Woedtke, T., & Kocher, T. (2012). Atmospheric Pressure Plasma: A High-Performance Tool for the Efficient Removal of Biofilms. PLoS ONE. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0042539
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.