Literature DB >> 15558368

A comparison of four electrical stimulation types on Staphylococcus aureus growth in vitro.

Harold L Merriman1, Chris A Hegyi, Cheryl R Albright-Overton, John Carlos, Robert W Putnam, Janet A Mulcare.   

Abstract

We evaluated the efficacy of common electrical stimulation (ES) types on bacterial growth in vitro using clinically relevant conditions. Four types of ES--continuous microamperage direct current (microADC), high-voltage pulsed current (HVPC), low-voltage monophasic milliamperage pulsed current (LVMmAPC), and low-voltage biphasic milliamperage pulsed current (LVBmAPC)--were each applied to a separate set of culture plates containing Staphylococcus aureus for 1 h at 37 degrees C on 3 consecutive days. After ES treatment, the zone of inhibition surrounding each electrode was measured. Zone of inhibition measurements showed a significant inhibitory effect for continuous microADC and HVPC (p < 0.05), but not for LVMmAPC and LVBmAPC. Differences in bacterial growth inhibition were not found for polarity and time. These data suggest that for infected wounds, HVPC and continuous microADC treatments may have an initial bacterial inhibitory effect, which does not significantly change with subsequent treatments.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15558368     DOI: 10.1682/jrrd.2004.02.0139

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Rehabil Res Dev        ISSN: 0748-7711


  9 in total

Review 1.  Biophysical Technologies for Management of Wound Bioburden.

Authors:  Holly Korzendorfer; Heather Hettrick
Journal:  Adv Wound Care (New Rochelle)       Date:  2014-12-01       Impact factor: 4.730

Review 2.  Bacterial Inhibition by Electrical Stimulation.

Authors:  Mohammad Reza Asadi; Giti Torkaman
Journal:  Adv Wound Care (New Rochelle)       Date:  2014-02-01       Impact factor: 4.730

3.  [Importance of modern treatment procedures for infected and colonized wounds in dermatology].

Authors:  G Daeschlein; S Lutze; A Arnold; S von Podewils; M Jünger
Journal:  Hautarzt       Date:  2014-11       Impact factor: 0.751

4.  Disposable Patterned Electroceutical Dressing (PED-10) Is Safe for Treatment of Open Clinical Chronic Wounds.

Authors:  Sashwati Roy; Shaurya Prakash; Shomita S Mathew-Steiner; Piya Das Ghatak; Varun Lochab; Travis H Jones; Prashanth Mohana Sundaram; Gayle M Gordillo; Vish V Subramaniam; Chandan K Sen
Journal:  Adv Wound Care (New Rochelle)       Date:  2019-04-03       Impact factor: 4.730

5.  Antibiofilm Activity of Low-Amperage Continuous and Intermittent Direct Electrical Current.

Authors:  Suzannah M Schmidt-Malan; Melissa J Karau; Julia Cede; Kerryl E Greenwood-Quaintance; Cassandra L Brinkman; Jayawant N Mandrekar; Robin Patel
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  2015-05-26       Impact factor: 5.191

6.  The growth of Staphylococcus aureus and Escherichia coli in low-direct current electric fields.

Authors:  Dunya Zituni; Heidi Schütt-Gerowitt; Marion Kopp; Martin Krönke; Klaus Addicks; Christian Hoffmann; Martin Hellmich; Franz Faber; Wilhelm Niedermeier
Journal:  Int J Oral Sci       Date:  2013-09-06       Impact factor: 6.344

7.  Silver-zinc redox-coupled electroceutical wound dressing disrupts bacterial biofilm.

Authors:  Jaideep Banerjee; Piya Das Ghatak; Sashwati Roy; Savita Khanna; Craig Hemann; Binbin Deng; Amitava Das; Jay L Zweier; Daniel Wozniak; Chandan K Sen
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2015-03-24       Impact factor: 3.240

Review 8.  A current affair: electrotherapy in wound healing.

Authors:  Jerome Hunckler; Achala de Mel
Journal:  J Multidiscip Healthc       Date:  2017-04-20

9.  Effects of high voltage pulsed current stimulation with a visible contraction intensity on expression of TGF-β1 and synthesis of type I collagen in wound-induced white rats.

Authors:  Jae-Keun Jeon; Seung-Kyu Park; Joon-Hee Lee
Journal:  J Phys Ther Sci       Date:  2015-05-26
  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.