Skip to main content
. 2013 Sep 13;12(4):469–483. doi: 10.1111/iwj.12142

Table 3.

Antimicrobial efficacy after 72 hours of continuous exposure to dressings on mature PA01 biofilms*

A: 72‐Hour exposure Mean log CFU/ml 95% CI log CFU/ml Log reduction Significance
Before treatment (0 hour) 7·076 6·221–7·931

0·694a

0·079b

ns

ns

No dressing 7·155 6·616–7·694

0·615a

b

ns

Wet gauze 7·770 7·154–8·386

a

−0·615b

ns

Algisite®‐M (Ca Alginate) 10·270 9·838–10·71

−2·505a

−3·12b

***

***

Aquacel® (NaCMC) 8·193 7·565–8·820

−0·423a

−1·038b

ns

ns

Acticoat®‐Absorb (Ca Alginate‐NanoAg) 8·024 7·524–8·524

−0·254a

−0·869b

ns

ns

Medihoney®‐Ca alginate pad 7·554 7·460–7·648

0·216a

−0·399b

ns

ns

Medihoney ointment 7·418 7·164–7·671

0·352a

−0·263b

ns

ns

Curity™ AMD (PHMB gauze) 7·305 6·861–7·749

0·465a

−0·15b

ns

ns

Tegaderm‐AgMesh (Ag Sulphate gauze) 7·376 6·812–7·939

0·394a

−0·221b

ns

ns

Aquacel‐Ag (NaCMC‐Ag) 6·969 6·511–7·427

0·801a

0·186b

ns

ns

Povidone‐iodine (PVP‐I) 6·657 5·952–7·363

1·113a

0·498b

ns

ns

4% Ethanol (ETOH) 6·485 6·162–6·807

1·285a

0·671b

ns

ns

Acticoat 7 (Polyethylene‐NanoAg) 6·460 5·741–7·178

1·31a

0·695b

ns

ns

Cadesorb® (cadexomer) 6·470 5·324–7·616

1·3a

0·685b

ns

ns

Silvasorb® gel (Polyacrylate–AgCl) 2·137 0·3237–3·95

5·633a

5·018b

***

***

Iodoflex™ (100% cadexomer iodine) 0 0–0

7·77a

7·155b

***

***

B: 72‐Hour exposure Mean log CFU/ml 95% CI log CFU/ml Log reduction Significance
Cadesorb (cadexomer)a 6·470 5·324–7·616
Iodoflex (100% cadexomer iodine) 0 0–0 6·470a ***
Algisite‐M (Ca Alginate)b 10·27 9·838–10·71
Acticoat‐Absorb (Ca Alginate‐NanoAg) 8·024 7·524–8·524 2·251b ***
Medihoney alginate pad 7·554 7·460–7·648 2·716b ***
Aquacel (NaCMC)c 8·193 7·565–8·820
Aquacel‐Ag (NaCMC‐Ag) 6·969 6·511–7·427 1·223c **

CFU, colony‐forming unit; CI, confidence interval.

*

All biofilms were cultured for 3 days on porcine explants and pre‐treated for 24 hours with high antibiotic immersion treatment to kill planktonic bacteria before dressing application, including the before treatment (0 hour) condition. Microbial load reduction due to antimicrobial dressings (single application) was compared to (A) wet gauze or no dressing control or (B) companion (vehicle alone) dressing control.

Compared to awet (ddH20) gauze control or bno dressing control.

Compared to companion dressing as indicated in each demarcated set a,b,c.

* = (0·01 ≤ P < 0·05), ** = (0·001 ≤ P < 0·01), *** = (P < 0·001) and ns = (P ≥ 0·05).