Literature DB >> 31145519

Effectiveness of biofilm-based wound care system on wound healing in chronic wounds.

Yukie Mori1, Gojiro Nakagami1,2, Aya Kitamura1, Takeo Minematsu2,3, Mikio Kinoshita4, Hiraku Suga5, Masakazu Kurita6, Chieko Hayashi7, Akiko Kawasaki7, Hiromi Sanada1,2.   

Abstract

A biofilm plays a crucial role in delaying wound healing. Sharp debridement, a possible effective method for eliminating biofilms, can only be applied to the wound with visible necrotic tissue; thus, no option has been available for eliminating biofilms that are not accompanied by necrotic tissue. Wound blotting was recently developed to visualize biofilm noninvasively and quickly, and ultrasonic debridement is available for biofilm removal. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to investigate the efficacy of "biofilm-based wound care system (BWCS)," a combination of wound blotting as a point-of-care testing and ultrasonic debridement, for promoting wound healing. Firstly, the cross-sectional study was conducted to examine the proportion of biofilm removal by ultrasonic debridement in pressure ulcers [Study 1]. Subsequently, the retrospective cohort study was conducted to examine the effectiveness of BWCS for healing of chronic wounds [Study 2]. The proportions of wound healing between wounds treated with BWCS and those with standard care in the home-visiting clinic were compared by Kaplan-Meier curve, and the Cox proportional hazard modeling was used to assess the effect of BWCS on wound healing. In Study 1, the median of biofilm removal proportion was 38.9% (interquartile range, 12.9-68.0%) for pressure ulcers treated with standard care and 65.2% (41.1-78.8%) for those treated with ultrasonic debridement (p = 0.009). In Study 2, the proportion of wound healing within 90 days was significantly higher in wounds treated with BWCS than in those treated with standard care (p = 0.001). The adjusted hazard ratio of BWCS for wound healing was 4.5 (95% confidence interval, 1.3-15.0; p = 0.015). In conclusion, we demonstrated that our novel approach, BWCS, can be a promising therapeutic strategy for visualizing biofilms that are not accompanied by necrotic tissue and promoting healing in chronic wounds.
© 2019 by the Wound Healing Society.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2019        PMID: 31145519     DOI: 10.1111/wrr.12738

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Wound Repair Regen        ISSN: 1067-1927            Impact factor:   3.617


  8 in total

1.  Combination application of ultrasonic debridement, methylene blue staining, and negative pressure wound therapy for severe pressure ulcers.

Authors:  Chao Lian; Hai-Li Liu; Yan-Ran Li; Xiao-Jun Liu; Xue-Lei Li
Journal:  Int Wound J       Date:  2019-11-03       Impact factor: 3.315

2.  Point-of-Care Wound Blotting with Alcian Blue Grading versus Fluorescence Imaging for Biofilm Detection and Predicting 90-Day Healing Outcomes.

Authors:  Yu-Feng Wu; Yu-Chen Lin; Hung-Wei Yang; Nai-Chen Cheng; Chao-Min Cheng
Journal:  Biomedicines       Date:  2022-05-22

3.  Biofilm model on mice skin wounds.

Authors:  Eline Lima Borges; Gilmara Lopes Amorim; Marina Barcelos de Miranda; Flaviano Dos Santos Martins; Antônio Carlos Martins Guedes; Kinulpe Honorato Sampaio; Josimare Aparecida Otoni Spira; Lucíola da Silva Barcelos
Journal:  Acta Cir Bras       Date:  2022-06-01       Impact factor: 1.564

Review 4.  Effectiveness of ultrasonic debridement on reduction of bacteria and biofilm in patients with chronic wounds: A scoping review.

Authors:  Yukie Kataoka; Mao Kunimitsu; Gojiro Nakagami; Sofoklis Koudounas; Carolina D Weller; Hiromi Sanada
Journal:  Int Wound J       Date:  2020-11-25       Impact factor: 3.315

5.  Synthesis and Biological Evaluation of Novel Cinnamic Acid-Based Antimicrobials.

Authors:  Marina Mingoia; Carmela Conte; Annalisa Di Rienzo; Marilisa Pia Dimmito; Lorella Marinucci; Gloria Magi; Hasan Turkez; Maria Concetta Cufaro; Piero Del Boccio; Antonio Di Stefano; Ivana Cacciatore
Journal:  Pharmaceuticals (Basel)       Date:  2022-02-15

Review 6.  Current treatments for biofilm-associated periprosthetic joint infection and new potential strategies.

Authors:  Anabelle Visperas; Daniel Santana; Alison K Klika; Carlos A Higuera-Rueda; Nicolas S Piuzzi
Journal:  J Orthop Res       Date:  2022-05-06       Impact factor: 3.102

Review 7.  Sampling the skin surface chemistry for diagnosis and prognosis.

Authors:  Guy H M Stanley; Katie Wang; Patrick Daly; Christopher Lau; Aoife M O'Brien; Cheryl Hamill; Mark Fear; Fiona M Wood
Journal:  Wound Repair Regen       Date:  2022-06-17       Impact factor: 3.401

8.  Antibiofilm Properties of Antiseptic Agents Used on Pseudomonas aeruginosa Isolated from Diabetic Foot Ulcers.

Authors:  Koko Barrigah-Benissan; Jerome Ory; Catherine Dunyach-Remy; Cassandra Pouget; Jean-Philippe Lavigne; Albert Sotto
Journal:  Int J Mol Sci       Date:  2022-09-24       Impact factor: 6.208

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.