These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.
26. In Vivo Acute Toxicity and Therapeutic Potential of a Synthetic Peptide, DP1 in a Staphylococcus aureus Infected Murine Wound Excision Model. Barman P; Sharma C; Joshi S; Sharma S; Maan M; Rishi P; Singla N; Saini A Probiotics Antimicrob Proteins; 2023 Nov; ():. PubMed ID: 37910332 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
27. Noncontact, low-frequency ultrasound as an effective therapy against Pseudomonas aeruginosa-infected biofilm wounds. Seth AK; Nguyen KT; Geringer MR; Hong SJ; Leung KP; Mustoe TA; Galiano RD Wound Repair Regen; 2013; 21(2):266-74. PubMed ID: 23421692 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
28. Cadexomer iodine provides superior efficacy against bacterial wound biofilms in vitro and in vivo. Fitzgerald DJ; Renick PJ; Forrest EC; Tetens SP; Earnest DN; McMillan J; Kiedaisch BM; Shi L; Roche ED Wound Repair Regen; 2017 Jan; 25(1):13-24. PubMed ID: 27859922 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
29. Secreted biofilm factors adversely affect cellular wound healing responses in vitro. Jeffery Marano R; Jane Wallace H; Wijeratne D; William Fear M; San Wong H; O'Handley R Sci Rep; 2015 Aug; 5():13296. PubMed ID: 26278131 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
30. Interaction between Staphylococcus aureus and Pseudomonas aeruginosa is beneficial for colonisation and pathogenicity in a mixed biofilm. Alves PM; Al-Badi E; Withycombe C; Jones PM; Purdy KJ; Maddocks SE Pathog Dis; 2018 Feb; 76(1):. PubMed ID: 29342260 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
31. Controlling methicillin resistant Staphyloccocus aureus and Pseudomonas aeruginosa wound infections with a novel biomaterial. Martineau L; Davis SC; Peng HT; Hung A J Invest Surg; 2007; 20(4):217-27. PubMed ID: 17710602 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
32. Histopathological comparisons of Staphylococcus aureus and Pseudomonas aeruginosa experimental infected porcine burn wounds. Chaney SB; Ganesh K; Mathew-Steiner S; Stromberg P; Roy S; Sen CK; Wozniak DJ Wound Repair Regen; 2017 May; 25(3):541-549. PubMed ID: 28466497 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
34. Evaluation of the Antimicrobial Peptide, RP557, for the Broad-Spectrum Treatment of Wound Pathogens and Biofilm. Woodburn KW; Jaynes JM; Clemens LE Front Microbiol; 2019; 10():1688. PubMed ID: 31396193 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
35. [IMPACT OF BIOFILM ON HEALING AND A METHOD FOR IDENTIFYING IT IN THE WOUND]. Skrlin J Acta Med Croatica; 2016 Mar; 70(1):29-32. PubMed ID: 27220187 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
36. Activity of histone H1.2 in infected burn wounds. Jacobsen F; Baraniskin A; Mertens J; Mittler D; Mohammadi-Tabrisi A; Schubert S; Soltau M; Lehnhardt M; Behnke B; Gatermann S; Steinau HU; Steinstraesser L J Antimicrob Chemother; 2005 May; 55(5):735-41. PubMed ID: 15772144 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
37. Discovery and Characterization of a High-Affinity Small Peptide Ligand, H1, Targeting FGFR2IIIc for Skin Wound Healing. Zhao Y; Wang Q; Jin Y; Li Y; Nie C; Huang P; Li Z; Zhang B; Su Z; Hong A; Chen X Cell Physiol Biochem; 2018; 49(3):1033-1048. PubMed ID: 30196288 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
38. Microbiology of equine wounds and evidence of bacterial biofilms. Westgate SJ; Percival SL; Knottenbelt DC; Clegg PD; Cochrane CA Vet Microbiol; 2011 May; 150(1-2):152-9. PubMed ID: 21273008 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
39. Antimicrobial ceragenins inhibit biofilms and affect mammalian cell viability and migration Olekson MA; You T; Savage PB; Leung KP FEBS Open Bio; 2017 Jul; 7(7):953-967. PubMed ID: 28680809 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
40. A Novel Peptide-Based Antimicrobial Wound Treatment is Effective Against Biofilms of Multi-Drug Resistant Wound Pathogens. Bayramov D; Li Z; Patel E; Izadjoo M; Kim H; Neff J Mil Med; 2018 Mar; 183(suppl_1):481-486. PubMed ID: 29635548 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related] [Previous] [Next] [New Search]