Malone M, Bjarnsholt T, McBain AJ, James GA, Stoodley P, Leaper D, Tachi M, Schultz G, Swanson T, Wolcott RD, et al.
Journal of wound care. Date of publication 2017 Jan 2;volume 26(1):20-25.
1. J Wound Care. 2017 Jan 2;26(1):20-25. doi: 10.12968/jowc.2017.26.1.20.
The prevalence of biofilms in chronic wounds: a systematic review and
meta-analysis of published data.
Malone M(1), Bjarnsholt T(2), McBain AJ(3), James GA(4), Stoodley P(5), Leaper
D(6), Tachi M(7), Schultz G(8), Swanson T(9), Wolcott RD(10).
Author information:
(1)Head of Department, Podiatric Medicine, Global Wound Biofilm Expert Panel;
Liverpool Hospital, South West Sydney LHD, Australia; and Ingham Institute of
Applied Medical Research, Sydney, Australia.
(2)University of Copenhagen, Costerton Biofilm Center, Denmark; and Department of
Clinical Microbiology, Rigshospitalet, Denmark.
(3)Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, University of Manchester.
(4)Center for Biofilm Engineering, Montana State University, US.
(5)Center for Microbial Interface Biology and Department of Microbial infection,
Immunity and Orthopaedics, Ohio State University, US.
(6)Institute of Skin Integrity and Infection Prevention, University of
Huddersfield, UK; and Imperial College, London, UK.
(7)Tohoku University Graduate School of Medicine, Sendai, Japan.
(8)Institute of Wound Research, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, College
of Medicine, University of Florida.
(9)South West Healthcare, Warrnambool, Victoria, Australia.
(10)Southwest Regional Wound Care Centre, Lubbock Texas, US.
The presence of biofilms in chronic non-healing wounds, has been identified
through in vitro model and in vivo animal data. However, human chronic wound
studies are under-represented and generally report low sample sizes. For this
reason we sought to ascertain the prevalence of biofilms in human chronic wounds
by undertaking a systematic review and meta-analysis. Our initial search
identified 554 studies from the literature databases (Cochrane Library, Embase,
Medline). After removal of duplicates, and those not meeting the requirements of
inclusion, nine studies involving 185 chronic wounds met the inclusion criteria.
Prevalence of biofilms in chronic wounds was 78.2 % (confidence interval [CI
61.6-89, p<0.002]). The results of our meta-analysis support our clinical
assumptions that biofilms are ubiquitous in human chronic non-healing wounds.
DOI: 10.12968/jowc.2017.26.1.20
PMID: 28103163 [Indexed for MEDLINE]
