A review of the scientific evidence for biofilms in wounds
Tóm tắt
Both chronic and acute dermal wounds are susceptible to infection due to sterile loss of the innate barrier function of the skin and dermal appendages, facilitating the development of microbial communities, referred to as biofilms, within the wound environment. Microbial biofilms are implicated in both the infection of wounds and failure of those wounds to heal. The aim of this review is to provide a summary of published papers detailing biofilms in wounds, the effect they have on infection and wound healing, and detailing methods employed for their detection. The studies highlighted within this paper provide evidence that biofilms reside within the chronic wound and represent an important mechanism underlying the observed, delayed healing and infection. The reasons for this include both protease activity and immunological suppression. Furthermore, a lack of responsiveness to an array of antimicrobial agents has been due to the biofilms’ ability to inherently resist antimicrobial agents. It is imperative that effective strategies are developed, tested prospectively, and employed in chronic wounds to support the healing process and to reduce infection rates. It is increasingly apparent that adoption of a biofilm‐based management approach to wound care, utilizing the “antibiofilm tool box” of therapies, to kill and prevent reattachment of microorganisms in the biofilm is producing the most positive clinical outcomes and prevention of infection.
Từ khóa
Tài liệu tham khảo
Walker JT, 2001, Industrial biofouling: detection, prevention and control, 103
Percival SL, 2005, Biofilms, persistence and ubiquity, 171
Percival SL, 2008, Microbiology and aging: clinical manifestations., 1
Thomas JG, 2008, Microbiology and aging: clinical manifestations, 15
Percival SL, 2004, The potential significance of biofilms in wounds, Wounds, 16, 234
Cutting KC, 2009, Biofilm management, Nurs Stand, 23, 64
Jensen PO, 2006, Rapid necrotic killing of PMNs is caused by quorum sensing controlled production of rhamnolipid by Pseudomonas aeruginosa, Microbiology, 3, 225
Mertz PM, 2003, Cutaneous biofilms: friend or foe?, Wounds, 15, 129
Serralta VW, 2001, Lifestyles of bacteria in wounds: presence of biofilms?, Wounds, 13, 29
Fadeev SB, 2009, Formation of biofilms by agents of surgical soft tissue infections, Zh Mikrobiol Epidemiol Immunobiol, 4, 114
Francois P, 1996, Host‐bacteria interactions in foreign body infections, Infect Cont Hosp Ep, 17, 514, 10.1017/S0195941700004707
Davis SC, 2008, Determining the effect of an oak bark formulation on methicillin‐resistant Staphylococcus aureus and wound healing in porcine wound models, Ostomy Wound Manage, 54, 16
Perez R, 2008, Relevance of animal models for wound healing, Wounds, 20, 3
Wolcott R, 2008, Surgical site infections: biofilms, dehiscence and wound healing, US Dermatol Touch Briefings, 56
PercivalSL BowlerP.Understanding the effects of bacterial communities and biofilms on wound healing. July 2004. Available athttp://www.worldwidewounds.com(accessed December 8 2011).
Cooper R, 2006, Biofilms, wound infection and the issue of control, Wounds, 2, 48
Saye DE, 2007, Recurring and antimicrobial‐resistant infections: considering the potential role of biofilms in clinical practice, Ostomy Wound Manage, 53, 46
Rhoades D, 2007, Biofilms: coming of age, 131