| Literature DB >> 31771245 |
Mariana Adina Matica1, Finn Lillelund Aachmann2, Anne Tøndervik3, Håvard Sletta3, Vasile Ostafe1.
Abstract
Fighting bacterial resistance is one of the concerns in modern days, as antibiotics remain the main resource of bacterial control. Data shows that for every antibiotic developed, there is a microorganism that becomes resistant to it. Natural polymers, as the source of antibacterial agents, offer a new way to fight bacterial infection. The advantage over conventional synthetic antibiotics is that natural antimicrobial agents are biocompatible, non-toxic, and inexpensive. Chitosan is one of the natural polymers that represent a very promising source for the development of antimicrobial agents. In addition, chitosan is biodegradable, non-toxic, and most importantly, promotes wound healing, features that makes it suitable as a starting material for wound dressings. This paper reviews the antimicrobial properties of chitosan and describes the mechanisms of action toward microbial cells as well as the interactions with mammalian cells in terms of wound healing process. Finally, the applications of chitosan as a wound-dressing material are discussed along with the current status of chitosan-based wound dressings existing on the market.Entities:
Keywords: antimicrobial properties; chitosan; mechanism of action; wound dressing; wound healing
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2019 PMID: 31771245 PMCID: PMC6928789 DOI: 10.3390/ijms20235889
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Mol Sci ISSN: 1422-0067 Impact factor: 5.923
Figure 1Schematic representation of five basic mechanisms of antibiotic action against microbial cells.
Figure 2Proposed interactions between chitosan and the bacterial cell wall. Electrostatic interaction between positively charged chitosan molecules and negatively charged lipopolysaccharides (Gram-negative bacteria) and teichoic acids (Gram-positive bacteria) may lead to the blocking of intra/extracellular exchanges or even cell wall disruption and, finally, leakage of cytoplasmic content.
Figure 3Schematic representation of chitosan mode of action on a Candida albicans cell. The fungal cell surface is negatively charged due to the carbohydrate side chains of mannoproteins, mainly sialic acids. Cationic chitosan molecules can cause ionic interactions with anionic groups and destabilize the cell wall. Other mechanisms of action proposed in the literature are metal chelation, enzyme denaturation, and chitosan interaction with phosphate groups of nucleic acids, all causing growth inhibition or even microbial death.
Figure 4Influence of degree of acetylation (DA) on chitosan physico-chemical and biological properties.
Molecular weight of different types of chitosan.
| Type of Chitosan | Molecular Weight Range | Reference |
|---|---|---|
| Oligochitosan | 4.7 kDa | [ |
| Low molecular weight chitosan (LMW) | ~10 kDa | [ |
| 22 kDa | [ | |
| 120 kDa | [ | |
| 13 kDa | [ | |
| 4.8 kDa | [ | |
| 3.69 kDa | [ | |
| 50–90 kDa | [ | |
| 50–190 kDa | [ | |
| Medium molecular weight chitosan (MMW) | 250 kDa | [ |
| 190–310 kDa | [ | |
| 190–310 kDa | [ | |
| High molecular weight chitosan (HMW) | 64.8–170 kDa | [ |
| 340 kDa | [ | |
| 310–375 kDa | [ |
Minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) of different types of chitosan (C).
| Microorganism | Type of Cs | MIC | References |
|---|---|---|---|
|
| LMW Cs | 32 μg/mL | [ |
| MMW Cs | |||
| HMW Cs | |||
| Cs oligosaccharide lactate | 4096 μg/mL | ||
|
| Cs 32 kDa | 2 mg/mL | [ |
| Cs 38 kDa | 2.3 mg/mL | ||
| Cs 138 kDa | 2.5 mg/mL | ||
| Cs 184 kDa | 3.3 mg/mL | ||
|
| LMW Cs | 2.5 mg/mL | [ |
| Nano Cs | 1.25 mg/mL | ||
|
| LMW Cs | 2.5 mg/mL | |
| Nano Cs | |||
|
| LMW Cs | 1.25 mg/mL | |
| Nano Cs | |||
|
| LMW Cs | 1.25 mg/mL | |
| Nano Cs | 2.5 mg/mL | ||
|
| Cs 322.04 kDa | 60 μg/mL | [ |
|
| 80 μg/mL | ||
| 60 μg/mL | |||
|
| 100 μg/mL | ||
|
| 80 μg/mL | ||
|
| Cs 41.1 kDa | 32 μg/mL | [ |
| Cs 14.3 kDa | 32 μg/mL | ||
| Cs 5.06 kDa | 32 μg/mL | ||
|
| Cs 41.1 kDa | 64 μg/mL | |
| Cs 14.3 kDa | 32 μg/mL | ||
| Cs 5.06 kDa | 16 μg/mL |
Properties of an ideal wound dressing.
| Characteristics of Wound Dressing | Importance in Wound Healing | Reference |
|---|---|---|
| Providing a moist wound environment | Prevents dehydration and cell death | [ |
| Removal of excess exudate | Exudate is essential for the wound healing process, but excess exudate can cause healthy tissue maceration, resulting in a chronic wound. | [ |
| Allows gaseous exchange | Oxygenation controls exudate levels and stimulates epithelialization and fibroblasts. | [ |
| Prevents infections | Microbial infections delay the wound healing process by prolonging the inflammatory phase and by inhibiting epidermal migration and collagen synthesis. | [ |
| Low adherence and painless removal | Removal of adherent dressing can be painful and can cause further damage to granulation tissue. | [ |
| Cost-effective | An ideal dressing should assure the wound healing process at a reasonable cost. | [ |
Advantages and disadvantages of major wound dressings.
| Wound Dressing Type | Advantages | Disadvantages | Reference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sponges |
high porosity thermal insulation sustain a moist environment absorb wound exudates enhance tissue regeneration |
mechanically weak may provoke skin maceration unsuitable for third-degree burn treatment or wounds with dry eschar | [ |
| Hydrogels |
high absorption properties provide a moist environment at the wound site water retention oxygen permeability ensure the solubility of growth factor/antimicrobial agents |
weak mechanical properties need for a secondary dressing | [ |
| Hydrocolloids |
non-adherent high density painless removal high absorption properties |
can be cytotoxic have an unpleasant odor low mechanical stability maintain acidic pH at the wound site | [ |
| Films |
impermeable to bacteria allows the healing process to be monitored painless removal |
hard to handle non-absorbent adhere to the wound bed and cause exudate accumulation | [ |
| Membranes |
act as physical barriers membranes simulate extracellular matrix (ECM) structure assure gas exchange, cell proliferation, and nutrient supply |
the materials and solvents used in the production process may be harmful | [ |
| Fibers |
non-adherent high porosity and absorption capacity mimic the skin’s extracellular matrix |
unsuitable for third-degree, eschar, and dry wounds if the wound is highly exudative, need a secondary dressing | [ |
Antimicrobial effect of chitosan derivatives demonstrated using the agar diffusion method.
| Chitosan-Based Wound Dressing | Degree of Deacetylation % | Pathogenic Microorganism | Inhibition Zone Diameter | Reference |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Chitosan/chitin/glucan nonwoven mats | n.a. | 12 mm | [ | |
| 8 mm | ||||
| 13 mm | ||||
| 11 mm | ||||
| Alginate/chitosan-based bilayer composite membrane loaded with ciprofloxacin hydrochloride | n.a. | pronounced inhibitory effect | [ | |
| Alginate–chitosan hydrogel loaded with tetracycline hydrochloride | n.a. | 10.5 mm | [ | |
| 10 mm | ||||
| Copper-incorporated microporous chitosan–polyethylene glycol hydrogels loaded with naproxen | >75% | pronounced inhibitory effect | [ | |
| Chitosan films with | 85% | 20.9 mm | [ | |
| 19.7 mm | ||||
| Chitosan–AgNO3 hydrogels (CTS-Ag+/NH3) | 90% | obvious antibacterial effect | [ | |
|
| ||||
| Chitosan–glycerol membrane loaded with Tetracycline Hydrochloride | 93% | 7.04 mm | [ | |
| 10.56 mm | ||||
| Chitosan–glycerol membrane loaded with silver sulfadiazine | 5.32 mm | |||
| 3.52 mm | ||||
| Chitosan–Ag nanoparticle bilayer sponge | 93.70% | 3 mm | [ | |
| 2 mm | ||||
| 4 mm | ||||
| Quaternized chitosan/polyvinyl alcohol/sodium carboxymethylcellulose blend film | 10.35 ± 0.12 mm | [ | ||
| 10.55 ± 0.20 mm | ||||
| Chitosan/polyethylene glycol fumarate/thymol hydrogel | 75–85% | 6.4 ± 0.9 mm | [ | |
| 10.5 ± 1.8 mm | ||||
| Bacterial cellulose–chitosan membranes | 90% | no inhibition zone | [ | |
| no inhibition zone |
n.a.—data not available.
Chitosan-based wound dressings on the market.
| Product | Dressing Type | Material | Producer |
|---|---|---|---|
| Axiostat® | Sponge | 100% chitosan | Axiobio |
| Chitoderm® plus | Superabsorber | Strong superabsorber coated with chitosan | Trusetal |
| ChitoSAM™ 100 | Non-woven chitosan dressing spun directly from chitosan | 100% chitosan | Sam Medical |
| Celox™ | Gauze (Celox Rapid, Celox Gauze) Granules (Celox A, Celox Granules) | Chito-R™ activated chitosan granules | MedTrade |
| ChitoClear® | Gel or liquid spray | ChitoClear® positively charged chitosan (the purest chitosan possible) | Primex |
| Opticell® | Gelling fiber | Primarily composed of chitosan (Cytoform chitosan-based gelling technology) | Medline |
| ChitoFlex® PRO | Hemostatic dressing active on both sides | Chitosan-based dressings | Tricol Biomedical |
| ChitoGauze® PRO | Chitosan-coated gauze | ||
| ChitoDot® | Double-sided hemostatic dressing | ||
| HemCon® Bandage PRO | Hemostatic bandage | ||
| HemCon Patch® PRO | Non-invasive hemostatic patch | ||
| HemCon® Strip PRO | Hemostatic bandage | ||
| KytoCel | Gelling fiber | Chitosan fibers | Aspen Medical |
| ExcelArrest® XT | Hemostatic patch | MC (modified chitosan) | Hemostasis |
| PosiSep® | Hemostatic sponge | NOCC (N-O-carboxymethyl chitosan) | |
| HemoPore® | Hemostatic bioresorbable nasal dressing | Chitosan lactate | Stryker |
| XSTAT | Hemostatic device containing superabsorbent sponges of chitosan | Wood pulp sponges coated with chitosan | RevMedX |
| Alchite (University of Bolton patent) | Composite fiber | Alginate and chitosan | University of Bolton patent |
| LQD | spray | CHITOSAN-FH02™ a higher positive charge and the highest degree of de-acetylation of any chitosan product | Medoderm GmbH Brancaster Pharma |
| ChitoHeal | Gel | ChitoTech | |
| ChitoClot Bandage | non-woven dressing | 100% chitosan-based, non-woven with adhesive back sheet | BenQ Materials BioMedical |
| ChitoClot Pad | sponge | 100% medical-grade chitosan | |
| ChitoClot Gauze | gauze | ||
| ChitoRhino | spray | Distilled water, chitosan, xylitol, natural sea salt, grapefruit seed extract, citric acid | Ideoto LLC |
| gel | Distilled water, all-natural sea salt, chitosan, xylitol, methylcellulose, aloe vera, grapefruit seed extract, citric acid |