Antimicrobial-free knitted fabric as wound dressing and the mechanism of promoting infected wound healing
Source abstract
Abstract
Fibrous biomaterials are widely used in the design and fabrication of antibacterial wound dressings. Two strategies are used to make anti-infective dressings: antibacterial and probiotic therapies, which have potential biotoxicity and other side-effects. Herein, we report a new strategy for fabricating wound dressings to combat infection. Poly(4-methyl-1-pentene) (PMP) fabric can remove bacteria from infectious wounds through dressing changes based on its efficient bacterial adhesion. The maximum adhered count of S. aureus and E. coli on the PMP fabric was 1.63 × 106 CFU/cm2 and 4.77 × 105 CFU/cm2, respectively. In addition, the PMP fabric could inhibit the twitching motility of bacteria, which is beneficial for inhibiting infection. The ability of the PMP fabric to accelerate wound healing was demonstrated in vivo in a rat wound model. After treatment with the PMP fabric dressing, pathogenic bacteria in the wound were removed through dressing change; therefore, the wound exhibited better healing speed than when the commercial dressing was used. The low bacterial concentration effectively stimulated the expression of growth factors and suppressed wound inflammation, thereby accelerating wound healing. PMP fabric has three advantages: (1) it has been approved for use in clinical treatment by the Food and Drug Administration; (2) no antibacterial agent or probiotics were used; (3) the fabric could be manufactured through an industrial production process. These results indicate that the new strategy can be used in the design of new-generation wound dressings for antibacterial applications.
Source: expertdata · Quality: candidate unverified · Source record ↗
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Wound Healing and Treatments · Antimicrobial agents and applications · Silk-based biomaterials and applications
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
References (38)
Show source-provided references
1. Li Y, Zhang X, Ying B A. On textile biomedical engineering. Sci China Tech Sci, 2019, 62: 945–95710.1007/s11431-018-9504-5 ↗
2. Liu X, Chen J L, Shao Q Q, et al. Robust, flame-retardant and colorful superamphiphobic aramid fabrics for extreme conditions. Sci China Tech Sci, 2021, 64: 1765–177410.1007/s11431-020-1781-y ↗
3. Stocco T D, Bassous N J, Zhao S, et al. Nanofibrous scaffolds for biomedical applications. Nanoscale, 2018, 10: 12228–1225510.1039/C8NR02002G ↗
4. Volpi M, Paradiso A, Costantini M, et al. Hydrogel-based fiber biofabrication techniques for skeletal muscle tissue engineering. ACS Biomater Sci Eng, 2022, 8: 379–40510.1021/acsbiomaterials.1c01145 ↗
5. Kim H S, Kumbar S G, Nukavarapu S P. Amorphous silica fiber matrix biomaterials: An analysis of material synthesis and characterization for tissue engineering. Bioactive Mater, 2023, 19: 155–16610.1016/j.bioactmat.2022.04.002 ↗
6. Qiu Z, Yu X, Zhang J, et al. Fibrous aggregates: Amplifying aggregation-induced emission to boost health protection. Biomaterials, 2022, 287: 12166610.1016/j.biomaterials.2022.121666 ↗
7. Phyo J B, Woo A, Yu H J, et al. Label-free SERS analysis of urine using a 3D-stacked AgNW-glass fiber filter sensor for the diagnosis of pancreatic cancer and prostate cancer. Anal Chem, 2021, 93: 3778–378510.1021/acs.analchem.0c04200 ↗
8. Venugopal D, Vishwakarma S, Kaur I, et al. Electrospun fiber-based strategies for controlling early innate immune cell responses: Towards immunomodulatory mesh designs that facilitate robust tissue repair. Acta Biomater, 2023, 163: 228–24710.1016/j.actbio.2022.06.004 ↗
9. Puhl D L, Mohanraj D, Nelson D W, et al. Designing electrospun fiber platforms for efficient delivery of genetic material and genome editing tools. Adv Drug Deliver Rev, 2022, 183: 11416110.1016/j.addr.2022.114161 ↗
10. Yazdi M K, Zare M, Khodadadi A, et al. Polydopamine biomaterials for skin regeneration. ACS Biomater Sci Eng, 2022, 8: 2196–221910.1021/acsbiomaterials.1c01436 ↗
11. Li Z, Zhu Y, Matson J B. pH-responsive self-assembling peptide-based biomaterials: Designs and applications. ACS Appl Bio Mater, 2022, 5: 4635–465110.1021/acsabm.2c00188 ↗
12. Zhao C X, Yuan X Y, Bai S, et al. Antifogging and antibacterial properties of amphiphilic coatings based on zwitterionic copolymers. Sci China Tech Sci, 2021, 64: 817–82610.1007/s11431-020-1699-3 ↗
13. Yin J, Xu L, Ahmed A. Batch preparation and characterization of electrospun porous polylactic acid-based nanofiber membranes for antibacterial wound dressing. Adv Fiber Mater, 2022, 4: 832–84410.1007/s42765-022-00141-y ↗
14. Gruppuso M, Turco G, Marsich E, et al. Polymeric wound dressings, an insight into polysaccharide-based electrospun membranes. Appl Mater Today, 2021, 24: 10114810.1016/j.apmt.2021.101148 ↗
15. Wang Y, Beekman J, Hew J, et al. Burn injury: Challenges and advances in burn wound healing, infection, pain and scarring. Adv Drug Deliver Rev, 2018, 123: 3–1710.1016/j.addr.2017.09.018 ↗
16. Zhang J, Hurren C, Lu Z, et al. pH-sensitive alginate hydrogel for synergistic anti-infection. Int J Biol Macromolecules, 2022, 222: 1723–173310.1016/j.ijbiomac.2022.09.234 ↗
17. Chen X, Zhang Q, Li J, et al. Rattle-structured rough nanocapsules with in-situ-formed gold nanorod cores for complementary gene/chemo/photothermal therapy. ACS Nano, 2018, 12: 5646–565610.1021/acsnano.8b01440 ↗
18. Yang Z, Ren X, Liu Y. N-halamine modified ceria nanoparticles: Antibacterial response and accelerated wound healing application via a 3D printed scaffold. Compos Part B-Eng, 2021, 227: 10939010.1016/j.compositesb.2021.109390 ↗
19. Zhao Y, Guo Q, Dai X, et al. A biomimetic non-antibiotic approach to eradicate drug-resistant infections. Adv Mater, 2019, 31: 180602410.1002/adma.201806024 ↗
20. Dai X, Zhao X, Liu Y, et al. Controlled synthesis and surface engineering of Janus chitosan-gold nanoparticles for photoacoustic imaging-guided synergistic gene/photothermal therapy. Small, 2021, 17: 200600410.1002/smll.202006004 ↗
21. Zou Y, Jin X, Zhang X P, et al. A multifunctional biomedical patch based on hyperbranched epoxy polymer and MXene. Sci China Tech Sci, 2021, 64: 2744–275410.1007/s11431-021-1843-3 ↗
22. Mei L, Zhang D, Shao H, et al. Injectable and self-healing probiotics-loaded hydrogel for promoting superbacteria-infected wound healing. ACS Appl Mater Interfaces, 2022, 14: 20538–2055010.1021/acsami.1c23713 ↗
23. Kim J S, Yu H, Woo M R, et al. Influence of hydrophilic polymers on mechanical property and wound recovery of hybrid bilayer wound dressing system for delivering thermally unstable probiotic. BioMater Adv, 2022, 135: 11269610.1016/j.msec.2022.112696 ↗
24. Markova S Y, Gries T, Teplyakov V V. Poly(4-methyl-1-pentene) as a semicrystalline polymeric matrix for gas separating membranes. J Membrane Sci, 2020, 598: 11775410.1016/j.memsci.2019.117754 ↗
25. Pflaum M, Kühn-Kauffeldt M, Schmeckebier S, et al. Endothelialization and characterization of titanium dioxide-coated gas-exchange membranes for application in the bioartificial lung. Acta Biomater, 2017, 50: 510–52110.1016/j.actbio.2016.12.017 ↗
26. Zhang Y, Zhang M, Xu X, et al. Anti-fouling surfaces for extra-corporeal membrane oxygenation by surface grafting of hydrophilic sulfoxide polymers. Biomacromolecules, 2022, 23: 4318–432610.1021/acs.biomac.2c00775 ↗
27. Obstals F, Vorobii M, Riedel T, et al. Improving hemocompatibility of membranes for extracorporeal membrane oxygenators by grafting nonthrombogenic polymer brushes. Macromol Biosci, 2018, 18: 170035910.1002/mabi.201700359 ↗
28. Lu Z, Zhang H, Huang J, et al. Gelatinase-responsive photonic crystal membrane for pathogenic bacteria detection and application in vitro health diagnosis. Biosens Bioelectron, 2022, 202: 11401310.1016/j.bios.2022.114013 ↗
29. Yang X, Zhong Y, Wang D, et al. A simple colorimetric method for viable bacteria detection based on cell counting Kit-8. Anal Methods, 2021, 13: 5211–521510.1039/D1AY01624E ↗
30. Zhang Y, Yu Y, Li G, et al. Bioadhesive glycosylated nanoformulations for extended trans-corneal drug delivery to suppress corneal neovascularization. J Mater Chem B, 2021, 9: 4190–420010.1039/D1TB00229E ↗
31. Thewes N, Loskill P, Jung P, et al. Hydrophobic interaction governs unspecific adhesion of Staphylococci: A single cell force spectroscopy study. Beilstein J Nanotechnol, 2014, 5: 1501–151210.3762/bjnano.5.163 ↗
32. Maikranz E, Spengler C, Thewes N, et al. Different binding mechanisms of Staphylococcus aureus to hydrophobic and hydrophilic surfaces. Nanoscale, 2020, 12: 19267–1927510.1039/D0NR03134H ↗
33. Wang Y, Kotsuchibashi Y, Liu Y, et al. Study of bacterial adhesion on biomimetic temperature responsive glycopolymer surfaces. ACS Appl Mater Interfaces, 2015, 7: 1652–166110.1021/am508792k ↗
34. Arima Y, Iwata H. Effect of wettability and surface functional groups on protein adsorption and cell adhesion using well-defined mixed self-assembled monolayers. Biomaterials, 2007, 28: 3074–308210.1016/j.biomaterials.2007.03.013 ↗
35. Chen Q, Yu S, Zhang D, et al. Impact of antifouling PEG layer on the performance of functional peptides in regulating cell behaviors. J Am Chem Soc, 2019, 141: 16772–1678010.1021/jacs.9b07105 ↗
36. Li B, Jain P, Ma J, et al. Trimethylamine N-oxide-derived zwitterionic polymers: A new class of ultralow fouling bioinspired materials. Sci Adv, 2019, 5: eaaw956210.1126/sciadv.aaw9562 ↗
37. Abrigo M, Kingshott P, McArthur S L. Electrospun polystyrene fiber diameter influencing bacterial attachment, proliferation, and growth. ACS Appl Mater Interfaces, 2015, 7: 7644–765210.1021/acsami.5b00453 ↗
38. Rzhepishevska O, Hakobyan S, Ruhal R, et al. The surface charge of anti-bacterial coatings alters motility and biofilm architecture. Biomater Sci, 2013, 1: 58910.1039/c3bm00197k ↗