Literature DB >> 30263875

Efficacy of Concentrated Surfactant-Based Wound Dressings in Wound Repair and Biofilm Reduction.

Anne-Marie Salisbury1, Dieter Mayer2, Rui Chen1, Steven L Percival1.   

Abstract

Objective: This study was set up to evaluate the efficacy of a concentrated surfactant-based wound dressing (with and without silver sulfadiazine [SSD]) on wound repair, by investigating their ability to enhance human dermal fibroblast proliferation and viability. In addition, the wound dressings were evaluated for their ability to suppress biofilms in a three-dimensional (3D) in vitro wound biofilm model and modulate the inflammatory cytokine interleukin-6 (IL-6) and tumor necrosis factor-alpha (TNFα). Approach: Problematic biofilms are well known to affect fibroblast and keratinocyte viability. To assess wound repair and inflammatory cytokine modulation, a direct cytotoxicity assay and a 3D keratinocyte-fibroblast model were employed.
Results: At 1 and 7 days posttreatment, the non-antimicrobial dressing was noncytotoxic and the antimicrobial dressing was moderately cytotoxic to adult human dermal fibroblasts cells. Within the 3D wound model, the biofilm demonstrated a decelerating effect on wound closure and a decrease in viable cells. When the non-antimicrobial- and antimicrobial-based concentrated surfactant-based wound dressing was applied to the wound model, reduced biofilm was observed. The application of wound dressings to the biofilm-infected wound also resulted in a reduction of IL-6 and TNFα. The concentrated surfactant-based wound dressing without an antimicrobial was shown to enhance cellular viability and migration. Innovation and
Conclusion: We have demonstrated the ability of a surfactant-based wound dressing to minimize the deleterious effects of a wound biofilm, modulate the secretion of inflammatory cytokines, and enhance cellular proliferation in a biofilm-infected wound model. Furthermore, the non-antimicrobial-based concentrated surfactant dressings did not affect cellular viability and therefore represents a multifaceted approach to the treatment of wounds infected with biofilms.

Entities:  

Keywords:  biofilm; biofilm control; cytotoxicity; surfactant; wound; wound dressing; wound healing

Year:  2018        PMID: 30263875      PMCID: PMC6156693          DOI: 10.1089/wound.2017.0782

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Adv Wound Care (New Rochelle)        ISSN: 2162-1918            Impact factor:   4.730


  12 in total

1.  The effect of topical negative pressure on wound biofilms using an in vitro wound model.

Authors:  Quan D Ngo; Karen Vickery; Anand K Deva
Journal:  Wound Repair Regen       Date:  2011-11-29       Impact factor: 3.617

2.  Biofilms in chronic wounds.

Authors:  Garth A James; Ellen Swogger; Randall Wolcott; Elinor deLancey Pulcini; Patrick Secor; Jennifer Sestrich; John W Costerton; Philip S Stewart
Journal:  Wound Repair Regen       Date:  2007-12-13       Impact factor: 3.617

3.  MMP-8 is the predominant collagenase in healing wounds and nonhealing ulcers.

Authors:  B C Nwomeh; H X Liang; I K Cohen; D R Yager
Journal:  J Surg Res       Date:  1999-02       Impact factor: 2.192

Review 4.  A review of the scientific evidence for biofilms in wounds.

Authors:  Steven L Percival; Katja E Hill; David W Williams; Samuel J Hooper; Dave W Thomas; John W Costerton
Journal:  Wound Repair Regen       Date:  2012 Sep-Oct       Impact factor: 3.617

Review 5.  Biofilms: survival mechanisms of clinically relevant microorganisms.

Authors:  Rodney M Donlan; J William Costerton
Journal:  Clin Microbiol Rev       Date:  2002-04       Impact factor: 26.132

6.  Evaluation of in vitro toxicity of polymeric micelles to human endothelial cells under different conditions.

Authors:  Fang Liu; Haikang Huang; Yu Gong; Juan Li; Xuefei Zhang; Yi Cao
Journal:  Chem Biol Interact       Date:  2016-12-23       Impact factor: 5.192

7.  AHL signaling molecules with a large acyl chain enhance biofilm formation on sulfur and metal sulfides by the bioleaching bacterium Acidithiobacillus ferrooxidans.

Authors:  Alex González; Sören Bellenberg; Sigde Mamani; Lina Ruiz; Alex Echeverría; Laurent Soulère; Alain Doutheau; Cecilia Demergasso; Wolfgang Sand; Yves Queneau; Mario Vera; Nicolas Guiliani
Journal:  Appl Microbiol Biotechnol       Date:  2012-07-03       Impact factor: 4.813

8.  Differential effects of planktonic and biofilm MRSA on human fibroblasts.

Authors:  Kelly R Kirker; Garth A James; Philip Fleckman; John E Olerud; Philip S Stewart
Journal:  Wound Repair Regen       Date:  2012-02-14       Impact factor: 3.617

9.  Loss of viability and induction of apoptosis in human keratinocytes exposed to Staphylococcus aureus biofilms in vitro.

Authors:  Kelly R Kirker; Patrick R Secor; Garth A James; Philip Fleckman; John E Olerud; Philip S Stewart
Journal:  Wound Repair Regen       Date:  2009-08-11       Impact factor: 3.617

Review 10.  Biofilms and Inflammation in Chronic Wounds.

Authors:  Ge Zhao; Marcia L Usui; Soyeon I Lippman; Garth A James; Philip S Stewart; Philip Fleckman; John E Olerud
Journal:  Adv Wound Care (New Rochelle)       Date:  2013-09       Impact factor: 4.730

View more
  2 in total

Review 1.  Biofilm Management in Wound Care.

Authors:  Chandan K Sen; Sashwati Roy; Shomita S Mathew-Steiner; Gayle M Gordillo
Journal:  Plast Reconstr Surg       Date:  2021-08-01       Impact factor: 5.169

2.  A comparative study on the cellular viability and debridement efficiency of antimicrobial-based wound dressings.

Authors:  Rui Chen; Anne-Marie Salisbury; Steven L Percival
Journal:  Int Wound J       Date:  2019-10-27       Impact factor: 3.315

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.