| Literature DB >> 31905975 |
Diogo Marcelo Lima Ribeiro1, Alexsander Rodrigues Carvalho Júnior1, Gustavo Henrique Rodrigues Vale de Macedo1, Vitor Lopes Chagas1, Lucas Dos Santos Silva1, Brenda da Silva Cutrim1, Deivid Martins Santos1, Bruno Luis Lima Soares1, Adrielle Zagmignan1, Rita de Cássia Mendonça de Miranda1, Priscilla Barbosa Sales de Albuquerque2, Luís Cláudio Nascimento da Silva1.
Abstract
Skin injuries constitute a gateway for pathogenic bacteria that can be either part of tissue microbiota or acquired from the environmental. These microorganisms (such as Acinetobacter baumannii, Enterococcus faecalis, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, and Staphylococcus aureus) produce virulence factors that impair tissue integrity and sustain the inflammatory phase leading for establishment of chronic wounds. The high levels of antimicrobial resistance have limited the therapeutic arsenal for combatting skin infections. Thus, the treatment of non-healing chronic wounds is a huge challenge for health services worldwide, imposing great socio-economic damage to the affected individuals. This scenario has encouraged the use of natural polymers, such as polysaccharide, in order to develop new formulations (membranes, nanoparticles, hydrogels, scaffolds) to be applied in the treatment of skin infections. In this non-exhaustive review, we discuss the applications of polysaccharide-based formulations in the healing of infected wounds in animal models and clinical trials. The formulations discussed in this review were prepared using alginate, cellulose, chitosan, and hyaluronic acid. In addition to have healing actions per se, these polysaccharide formulations can act as transdermal drug delivery systems, controlling the release of active ingredients (such as antimicrobial and healing agents). The papers show that these polysaccharides-based formulations are efficient in controlling infection and improve the healing, even in chronic infected wounds. These data should positively impact the design of new dressings to treat skin infections.Entities:
Keywords: alginate; cellulose; chitosan; hyaluronic acid; infected wounds
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2019 PMID: 31905975 PMCID: PMC7022374 DOI: 10.3390/biom10010063
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Biomolecules ISSN: 2218-273X
Summary of fundamental and secondary characteristics for an ideal dressing.
| Fundamental Characteristics | Secondary Characteristics |
|---|---|
|
It should offer mechanical protection; It should keep the wound with optimum moisture and pH; It should allow gas exchange with the environment; It should ensure biological barrier; It should have affordable cost; It should be water resistant and easily removable; It should not need frequent changes; It should not be toxic or cause allergic reactions; It should not release non-biodegradable particles or fibers into the wound. It should not cause pain when applied or removed. |
It could promote wound healing; It could have antimicrobial activity; It could have hemostatic activity; It could promote the debridement; It should minimize the scar tissue formation; It could be transparent to allow healing monitoring; It could inactivate proteolytic enzymes in chronic wounds; It could be able to absorb bad odor. |
Based on [13,14,15,16,17,18,19].
Advantages and disadvantages of some dressings used for the treatment of wounds.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
They are indicated for wounds with moderate to high levels of exudates. |
They are semipermeable and have good porosity; They provide thermal insulation; They ensure a moist environment; They are suitable for sensitive and fragile skin; They have good absorption capacity; They can reduce over granulation; They allow atraumatic removal. |
They do not offer mechanical protection; They are not suitable for treatment of burns. | [ |
|
|
They are indicated for dry necrotic wounds and minimally exuding wounds. |
They have high water content and maintain a moist environment; They are clear or transparent, allowing the wound monitoring; They promote re-epithelialization; They facilitate autolytic debridement of necrotic area. |
They have weak mechanical properties; They are used in combination with a secondary dressing (such as foams). | [ |
|
|
They are suitable for partial- or full-thickness acute and chronic wounds. |
They maintain a moist environment; They absorb minimal to moderate amounts of drainage; They are easy to be removed; They facilitate autolytic debridement of necrotic area; They contribute to pain management; They provide a barrier to external microorganism; They promote re-epithelialization; They promote acidification which can inhibit bacteria growth. |
They can have toxicity; They have weak mechanical properties; They can have unpleasant odor. | [ |
|
|
They can be used as primary or secondary dressings. As primary dressing, they are indicated for dry, superficial wound. As a secondary dressing they can be used combined with foam dressings in heavier exuding wounds. |
They are semipermeable (impermeability to water, bacteria, and dirt; but permeable to wet vapors); They maintain a moist environment; They are flexible; They are clear or transparent, allowing the wound monitoring. |
They do not absorb exudates; They generally require a border of dry, intact skin for application (for adhesiveness); They can damage the epidermal skin layer during the removal. | [ |
|
|
They are indicated for infected wounds with moderate to heavily exuding wounds. |
They have high capacity to absorb exudate (up to 20 times their weight); They are permeable to wet vapors; They maintain a moist environment; They are flexible and biodegradable; They minimize bacterial infection. |
They can cause excessive dehydration (not indicated to dry wounds); Some membranes require secondary dressings (to avoid dryness). | [ |
Figure 1Structural representations of the polysaccharides used for development of dressings evaluated in this study. (a) Alginate; (b) cellulose; (c) chitosan; (d) hyaluronic acid.
Polysaccharide-based formulations employed in the treatment of skin-related infections in animal models and clinical trials.
| Polysaccharide | Co-Polymer | Formulation Type | Incorporated Agent | Infection Model | Bacteria | Ref. |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Alginate | - | Alginate dressing | Silver | Human | - | [ |
| Alginate dressing | Silver | Human | - | [ | ||
| - | Alginate dressing | CM11 peptide | Animal (mice) | MRSA | [ | |
| - | Hydrogel | Honey | Animal (rats) | [ | ||
| Cellulose (Sodium carboxymethyl cellulose) | - | Film | - | Animal (rats) | [ | |
| Cellulose (Hydroxypropyl cellulose) | - | Gel | PXL150 peptide | Animal (mice) |
| [ |
| Cellulose | Collagen | Scaffolds | Curcumin (loaded in gelatin microspheres) | Animal (rats) | [ | |
| Chitosan acetate | - | Dressing | - | Animal (rats) | [ | |
| - | Dressing | Silver nanoparticles | Animal (mice) | [ | ||
| Chitosan | Dressing | Silver nanoparticles | Animal (mice) | MRSA | [ | |
| Collagen | Hydrogel | Lysostaphin | Animal (rabbits) | MRSA | [ | |
| Chitosan (glycol chitosan) | Aldehyde-modified poly(ethylene glycol) derivative | Hydrogel | Colistin | Animal (mice) |
| [ |
| Chitosan (Carboxymethyl chitosan) | - | - Nanoparticles | - | Animal (rabbits) | [ | |
| Chitosan | Poly(lactic-co-glycolic acid) | Nanofibrous Membranes | - | Animal (mice) |
| [ |
| Hyaluronic acid | - | Hydrogel | EDTA−Fe3+; PDGF-BB growth factor | Animal (mice) | [ | |
| Dextran | Hydrogel | Sanguinarine (loaded in gelatin microspheres) | Animal (mice) | [ | ||
| - | Topical spray | Metallic silver | Human | - | [ |