{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.03266550522648084, 'fraction_numerical': 0.028310104529616725, 'mean_word_length': 5.7558823529411764, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 1, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Development of a PHMB hydrogel‐modified wound scaffold dressing with antibacterial activity

Current wound scaffold dressing constructs can facilitate wound healing but do not exhibit antibacterial activity, resulting in high infection rates. We aimed to endow wound scaffold dressing with anti‐infective ability by polyhexamethylenebiguanide (PHMB). We prepared PHMB hydrogel at varying concentrations (0.25%, 0.5%, 1%, 2%) and assessed release and cytotoxicity. PHMB hydrogel was added to the wound scaffold dressing to generate a PHMB hydrogel‐modified wound scaffold dressing. Wound healing and infection prevention were evaluated using a full‐thickness skin defect model in rats. In vitro, the hydrogel PHMB release time positively correlated with PHMB concentration, with 1% allowing sufficiently long release time to encompass the high‐incidence period (3‐5 days) of infection following wound scaffold dressing implantation. Implantation of 1% PHMB hydrogel into the skin did not cause adverse responses. in vitro cytotoxicity assays showed the PHMB hydrogel‐modified wound scaffold dressing did not significantly affect proliferation of fibroblasts or vascular endothelial cells, 99.90% vs 99.84% for fibroblasts and 100.21% vs 99.28% for vascular endothelial cells at 21 days. Transplantation of PHMB hydrogel‐modified wound scaffold dressing/unmodified wound scaffold dressing on the non‐infected wounds of rats yielded no significant difference in relative vascularization rate, 47.40 vs 50.87 per view at 21 days, whereas bacterial content of the wound tissue in the PHMB hydrogel‐modified wound scaffold dressing group was significantly lower than the unmodified wound scaffold dressing group, (1.80 ± 0.35) × 103 vs (9.34 ± 0.45) × 103 at 14 days. Prevalence of persistent wound infection in the rats receiving PHMB hydrogel‐modified wound scaffold dressing transplantation onto infected wounds was significantly lower than the unmodified wound scaffold dressing group, 30% vs 100%. PHMB hydrogel‐modified wound scaffold dressing exhibited suitable antibacterial ability, and its biological activity did not significantly differ from that of the unmodified wound scaffold dressing, thereby allowing it to effectively prevent infection following wound scaffold dressing implantation.