Anne-Marie Salisbury1, Dieter Mayer2, Rui Chen1, Steven L Percival1. 1. 5D Health Protection Group Ltd., Centre of Excellence in Biofilm Science (CEBS), Liverpool Bio-Innovation Hub, Liverpool, United Kingdom. 2. Department of Surgery, HFR Fribourg-Hôpital Cantonal, Fribourg, Switzerland.
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.
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.
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
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
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
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
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