Development of a PHMB hydrogel‐modified wound scaffold dressing with antibacterial activity

Current wound scaffold dressing constructs can facilitate wound healing but do not exhibit antibacterial activity, resulting in high infection rates. We aimed to endow wound scaffold dressing with anti‐infective ability by polyhexamethylenebiguanide (PHMB). We prepared PHMB hydrogel at varying conce...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Wound repair and regeneration 2020-07, Vol.28 (4), p.480-492
Hauptverfasser: Jin, Jian, Chen, Zheng‐Li, Xiang, Yang, Tang, Tao, Zhou, Hao, Hong, Xu‐Dong, Fan, Hao, Zhang, Xu‐Dong, Luo, Peng‐Fei, Ma, Bing, Wang, Guang‐yi, Xia, Zhao‐Fan
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 492
container_issue 4
container_start_page 480
container_title Wound repair and regeneration
container_volume 28
creator Jin, Jian
Chen, Zheng‐Li
Xiang, Yang
Tang, Tao
Zhou, Hao
Hong, Xu‐Dong
Fan, Hao
Zhang, Xu‐Dong
Luo, Peng‐Fei
Ma, Bing
Wang, Guang‐yi
Xia, Zhao‐Fan
description Current wound scaffold dressing constructs can facilitate wound healing but do not exhibit antibacterial activity, resulting in high infection rates. We aimed to endow wound scaffold dressing with anti‐infective ability by polyhexamethylenebiguanide (PHMB). We prepared PHMB hydrogel at varying concentrations (0.25%, 0.5%, 1%, 2%) and assessed release and cytotoxicity. PHMB hydrogel was added to the wound scaffold dressing to generate a PHMB hydrogel‐modified wound scaffold dressing. Wound healing and infection prevention were evaluated using a full‐thickness skin defect model in rats. In vitro, the hydrogel PHMB release time positively correlated with PHMB concentration, with 1% allowing sufficiently long release time to encompass the high‐incidence period (3‐5 days) of infection following wound scaffold dressing implantation. Implantation of 1% PHMB hydrogel into the skin did not cause adverse responses. in vitro cytotoxicity assays showed the PHMB hydrogel‐modified wound scaffold dressing did not significantly affect proliferation of fibroblasts or vascular endothelial cells, 99.90% vs 99.84% for fibroblasts and 100.21% vs 99.28% for vascular endothelial cells at 21 days. Transplantation of PHMB hydrogel‐modified wound scaffold dressing/unmodified wound scaffold dressing on the non‐infected wounds of rats yielded no significant difference in relative vascularization rate, 47.40 vs 50.87 per view at 21 days, whereas bacterial content of the wound tissue in the PHMB hydrogel‐modified wound scaffold dressing group was significantly lower than the unmodified wound scaffold dressing group, (1.80 ± 0.35) × 103 vs (9.34 ± 0.45) × 103 at 14 days. Prevalence of persistent wound infection in the rats receiving PHMB hydrogel‐modified wound scaffold dressing transplantation onto infected wounds was significantly lower than the unmodified wound scaffold dressing group, 30% vs 100%. PHMB hydrogel‐modified wound scaffold dressing exhibited suitable antibacterial ability, and its biological activity did not significantly differ from that of the unmodified wound scaffold dressing, thereby allowing it to effectively prevent infection following wound scaffold dressing implantation.
doi_str_mv 10.1111/wrr.12813
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2391976582</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2391976582</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c2403-d0bcabf2fc3be8e47158f9e7e95fc72b15d64147e3c8aca905904f3bd228f39a3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kLtOwzAUhi0EotwGXgB5hCHgS9zEI3eQikAVCBYUOfZxa5TExU6puvEIPCNPQqCFjbOcf_j0DR9Cu5Qc0u6OZiEcUpZTvoI2qGBpkmbiabXbpJ8lVLKshzZjfCGECCHzddTjjJOUiXwDPZ_BG1R-UkPTYm-xwndXNyd4PDfBj6D6fP-ovXHWgcEzP20MjlpZ6yuDTYAYXTPCM9eOsWpaVyrdQnCqwt1wb66db6M1q6oIO8u_hR4uzu9Pr5LB7eX16fEg0SwlPDGk1Kq0zGpeQg5pRkVuJWQghdUZK6kw_ZSmGXCdK60kEZKklpeGsdxyqfgW2l94J8G_TiG2Re2ihqpSDfhpLBiXVGZ9kbMOPVigOvgYA9hiElytwrygpPiuWXQ1i5-aHbu31E7LGswf-ZuvA44WwMxVMP_fVDwOhwvlF27HgTo</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2391976582</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Development of a PHMB hydrogel‐modified wound scaffold dressing with antibacterial activity</title><source>Wiley Online Library Journals Frontfile Complete</source><creator>Jin, Jian ; Chen, Zheng‐Li ; Xiang, Yang ; Tang, Tao ; Zhou, Hao ; Hong, Xu‐Dong ; Fan, Hao ; Zhang, Xu‐Dong ; Luo, Peng‐Fei ; Ma, Bing ; Wang, Guang‐yi ; Xia, Zhao‐Fan</creator><creatorcontrib>Jin, Jian ; Chen, Zheng‐Li ; Xiang, Yang ; Tang, Tao ; Zhou, Hao ; Hong, Xu‐Dong ; Fan, Hao ; Zhang, Xu‐Dong ; Luo, Peng‐Fei ; Ma, Bing ; Wang, Guang‐yi ; Xia, Zhao‐Fan</creatorcontrib><description>Current wound scaffold dressing constructs can facilitate wound healing but do not exhibit antibacterial activity, resulting in high infection rates. We aimed to endow wound scaffold dressing with anti‐infective ability by polyhexamethylenebiguanide (PHMB). We prepared PHMB hydrogel at varying concentrations (0.25%, 0.5%, 1%, 2%) and assessed release and cytotoxicity. PHMB hydrogel was added to the wound scaffold dressing to generate a PHMB hydrogel‐modified wound scaffold dressing. Wound healing and infection prevention were evaluated using a full‐thickness skin defect model in rats. In vitro, the hydrogel PHMB release time positively correlated with PHMB concentration, with 1% allowing sufficiently long release time to encompass the high‐incidence period (3‐5 days) of infection following wound scaffold dressing implantation. Implantation of 1% PHMB hydrogel into the skin did not cause adverse responses. in vitro cytotoxicity assays showed the PHMB hydrogel‐modified wound scaffold dressing did not significantly affect proliferation of fibroblasts or vascular endothelial cells, 99.90% vs 99.84% for fibroblasts and 100.21% vs 99.28% for vascular endothelial cells at 21 days. Transplantation of PHMB hydrogel‐modified wound scaffold dressing/unmodified wound scaffold dressing on the non‐infected wounds of rats yielded no significant difference in relative vascularization rate, 47.40 vs 50.87 per view at 21 days, whereas bacterial content of the wound tissue in the PHMB hydrogel‐modified wound scaffold dressing group was significantly lower than the unmodified wound scaffold dressing group, (1.80 ± 0.35) × 103 vs (9.34 ± 0.45) × 103 at 14 days. Prevalence of persistent wound infection in the rats receiving PHMB hydrogel‐modified wound scaffold dressing transplantation onto infected wounds was significantly lower than the unmodified wound scaffold dressing group, 30% vs 100%. PHMB hydrogel‐modified wound scaffold dressing exhibited suitable antibacterial ability, and its biological activity did not significantly differ from that of the unmodified wound scaffold dressing, thereby allowing it to effectively prevent infection following wound scaffold dressing implantation.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1067-1927</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1524-475X</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1111/wrr.12813</identifier><identifier>PMID: 32304258</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Hoboken, USA: John Wiley &amp; Sons, Inc</publisher><ispartof>Wound repair and regeneration, 2020-07, Vol.28 (4), p.480-492</ispartof><rights>2020 by the Wound Healing Society</rights><rights>This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c2403-d0bcabf2fc3be8e47158f9e7e95fc72b15d64147e3c8aca905904f3bd228f39a3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c2403-d0bcabf2fc3be8e47158f9e7e95fc72b15d64147e3c8aca905904f3bd228f39a3</cites><orcidid>0000-0002-8192-2693 ; 0000-0001-6706-2300</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111%2Fwrr.12813$$EPDF$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111%2Fwrr.12813$$EHTML$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,1411,27901,27902,45550,45551</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32304258$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Jin, Jian</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Chen, Zheng‐Li</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Xiang, Yang</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Tang, Tao</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Zhou, Hao</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hong, Xu‐Dong</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Fan, Hao</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Zhang, Xu‐Dong</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Luo, Peng‐Fei</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ma, Bing</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wang, Guang‐yi</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Xia, Zhao‐Fan</creatorcontrib><title>Development of a PHMB hydrogel‐modified wound scaffold dressing with antibacterial activity</title><title>Wound repair and regeneration</title><addtitle>Wound Repair Regen</addtitle><description>Current wound scaffold dressing constructs can facilitate wound healing but do not exhibit antibacterial activity, resulting in high infection rates. We aimed to endow wound scaffold dressing with anti‐infective ability by polyhexamethylenebiguanide (PHMB). We prepared PHMB hydrogel at varying concentrations (0.25%, 0.5%, 1%, 2%) and assessed release and cytotoxicity. PHMB hydrogel was added to the wound scaffold dressing to generate a PHMB hydrogel‐modified wound scaffold dressing. Wound healing and infection prevention were evaluated using a full‐thickness skin defect model in rats. In vitro, the hydrogel PHMB release time positively correlated with PHMB concentration, with 1% allowing sufficiently long release time to encompass the high‐incidence period (3‐5 days) of infection following wound scaffold dressing implantation. Implantation of 1% PHMB hydrogel into the skin did not cause adverse responses. in vitro cytotoxicity assays showed the PHMB hydrogel‐modified wound scaffold dressing did not significantly affect proliferation of fibroblasts or vascular endothelial cells, 99.90% vs 99.84% for fibroblasts and 100.21% vs 99.28% for vascular endothelial cells at 21 days. Transplantation of PHMB hydrogel‐modified wound scaffold dressing/unmodified wound scaffold dressing on the non‐infected wounds of rats yielded no significant difference in relative vascularization rate, 47.40 vs 50.87 per view at 21 days, whereas bacterial content of the wound tissue in the PHMB hydrogel‐modified wound scaffold dressing group was significantly lower than the unmodified wound scaffold dressing group, (1.80 ± 0.35) × 103 vs (9.34 ± 0.45) × 103 at 14 days. Prevalence of persistent wound infection in the rats receiving PHMB hydrogel‐modified wound scaffold dressing transplantation onto infected wounds was significantly lower than the unmodified wound scaffold dressing group, 30% vs 100%. PHMB hydrogel‐modified wound scaffold dressing exhibited suitable antibacterial ability, and its biological activity did not significantly differ from that of the unmodified wound scaffold dressing, thereby allowing it to effectively prevent infection following wound scaffold dressing implantation.</description><issn>1067-1927</issn><issn>1524-475X</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2020</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNp1kLtOwzAUhi0EotwGXgB5hCHgS9zEI3eQikAVCBYUOfZxa5TExU6puvEIPCNPQqCFjbOcf_j0DR9Cu5Qc0u6OZiEcUpZTvoI2qGBpkmbiabXbpJ8lVLKshzZjfCGECCHzddTjjJOUiXwDPZ_BG1R-UkPTYm-xwndXNyd4PDfBj6D6fP-ovXHWgcEzP20MjlpZ6yuDTYAYXTPCM9eOsWpaVyrdQnCqwt1wb66db6M1q6oIO8u_hR4uzu9Pr5LB7eX16fEg0SwlPDGk1Kq0zGpeQg5pRkVuJWQghdUZK6kw_ZSmGXCdK60kEZKklpeGsdxyqfgW2l94J8G_TiG2Re2ihqpSDfhpLBiXVGZ9kbMOPVigOvgYA9hiElytwrygpPiuWXQ1i5-aHbu31E7LGswf-ZuvA44WwMxVMP_fVDwOhwvlF27HgTo</recordid><startdate>202007</startdate><enddate>202007</enddate><creator>Jin, Jian</creator><creator>Chen, Zheng‐Li</creator><creator>Xiang, Yang</creator><creator>Tang, Tao</creator><creator>Zhou, Hao</creator><creator>Hong, Xu‐Dong</creator><creator>Fan, Hao</creator><creator>Zhang, Xu‐Dong</creator><creator>Luo, Peng‐Fei</creator><creator>Ma, Bing</creator><creator>Wang, Guang‐yi</creator><creator>Xia, Zhao‐Fan</creator><general>John Wiley &amp; Sons, Inc</general><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8192-2693</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6706-2300</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>202007</creationdate><title>Development of a PHMB hydrogel‐modified wound scaffold dressing with antibacterial activity</title><author>Jin, Jian ; Chen, Zheng‐Li ; Xiang, Yang ; Tang, Tao ; Zhou, Hao ; Hong, Xu‐Dong ; Fan, Hao ; Zhang, Xu‐Dong ; Luo, Peng‐Fei ; Ma, Bing ; Wang, Guang‐yi ; Xia, Zhao‐Fan</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c2403-d0bcabf2fc3be8e47158f9e7e95fc72b15d64147e3c8aca905904f3bd228f39a3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2020</creationdate><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Jin, Jian</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Chen, Zheng‐Li</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Xiang, Yang</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Tang, Tao</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Zhou, Hao</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hong, Xu‐Dong</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Fan, Hao</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Zhang, Xu‐Dong</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Luo, Peng‐Fei</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ma, Bing</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wang, Guang‐yi</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Xia, Zhao‐Fan</creatorcontrib><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Wound repair and regeneration</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Jin, Jian</au><au>Chen, Zheng‐Li</au><au>Xiang, Yang</au><au>Tang, Tao</au><au>Zhou, Hao</au><au>Hong, Xu‐Dong</au><au>Fan, Hao</au><au>Zhang, Xu‐Dong</au><au>Luo, Peng‐Fei</au><au>Ma, Bing</au><au>Wang, Guang‐yi</au><au>Xia, Zhao‐Fan</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Development of a PHMB hydrogel‐modified wound scaffold dressing with antibacterial activity</atitle><jtitle>Wound repair and regeneration</jtitle><addtitle>Wound Repair Regen</addtitle><date>2020-07</date><risdate>2020</risdate><volume>28</volume><issue>4</issue><spage>480</spage><epage>492</epage><pages>480-492</pages><issn>1067-1927</issn><eissn>1524-475X</eissn><abstract>Current wound scaffold dressing constructs can facilitate wound healing but do not exhibit antibacterial activity, resulting in high infection rates. We aimed to endow wound scaffold dressing with anti‐infective ability by polyhexamethylenebiguanide (PHMB). We prepared PHMB hydrogel at varying concentrations (0.25%, 0.5%, 1%, 2%) and assessed release and cytotoxicity. PHMB hydrogel was added to the wound scaffold dressing to generate a PHMB hydrogel‐modified wound scaffold dressing. Wound healing and infection prevention were evaluated using a full‐thickness skin defect model in rats. In vitro, the hydrogel PHMB release time positively correlated with PHMB concentration, with 1% allowing sufficiently long release time to encompass the high‐incidence period (3‐5 days) of infection following wound scaffold dressing implantation. Implantation of 1% PHMB hydrogel into the skin did not cause adverse responses. in vitro cytotoxicity assays showed the PHMB hydrogel‐modified wound scaffold dressing did not significantly affect proliferation of fibroblasts or vascular endothelial cells, 99.90% vs 99.84% for fibroblasts and 100.21% vs 99.28% for vascular endothelial cells at 21 days. Transplantation of PHMB hydrogel‐modified wound scaffold dressing/unmodified wound scaffold dressing on the non‐infected wounds of rats yielded no significant difference in relative vascularization rate, 47.40 vs 50.87 per view at 21 days, whereas bacterial content of the wound tissue in the PHMB hydrogel‐modified wound scaffold dressing group was significantly lower than the unmodified wound scaffold dressing group, (1.80 ± 0.35) × 103 vs (9.34 ± 0.45) × 103 at 14 days. Prevalence of persistent wound infection in the rats receiving PHMB hydrogel‐modified wound scaffold dressing transplantation onto infected wounds was significantly lower than the unmodified wound scaffold dressing group, 30% vs 100%. PHMB hydrogel‐modified wound scaffold dressing exhibited suitable antibacterial ability, and its biological activity did not significantly differ from that of the unmodified wound scaffold dressing, thereby allowing it to effectively prevent infection following wound scaffold dressing implantation.</abstract><cop>Hoboken, USA</cop><pub>John Wiley &amp; Sons, Inc</pub><pmid>32304258</pmid><doi>10.1111/wrr.12813</doi><tpages>13</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8192-2693</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6706-2300</orcidid></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1067-1927
ispartof Wound repair and regeneration, 2020-07, Vol.28 (4), p.480-492
issn 1067-1927
1524-475X
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2391976582
source Wiley Online Library Journals Frontfile Complete
title Development of a PHMB hydrogel‐modified wound scaffold dressing with antibacterial activity
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-02T10%3A27%3A06IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Development%20of%20a%20PHMB%20hydrogel%E2%80%90modified%20wound%20scaffold%20dressing%20with%20antibacterial%20activity&rft.jtitle=Wound%20repair%20and%20regeneration&rft.au=Jin,%20Jian&rft.date=2020-07&rft.volume=28&rft.issue=4&rft.spage=480&rft.epage=492&rft.pages=480-492&rft.issn=1067-1927&rft.eissn=1524-475X&rft_id=info:doi/10.1111/wrr.12813&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2391976582%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2391976582&rft_id=info:pmid/32304258&rfr_iscdi=true