Available Online at http://www.recentscientific.

com
International Journal of
CODEN: IJRSFP (USA)
Recent Scientific
International Journal of Recent Scientific Research Research
Vol. 13, Issue, 06 (A), pp. 1388-1400, June, 2022
ISSN: 0976-3031 DOI: 10.24327/IJRSR
Research Article
THE POTENTIAL OF WOUND HEALING BY MICROBIAL CELLULOSE
Nainika Srivastava, Shreya Jha and Subhrojyoti Ghosh
Department of Biotechnology, Heritage Institute of Technology, Kolkata 700107, India
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.24327/ijrsr.2022.1306.0295

ARTICLE INFO ABSTRACT

Article History: Microbial Cellulose refers to cellulose produced by certain strains of bacteria including Acetobacter
th
Received 12 March, 2022 xylinum or Gluconacetobacterxylinum. The lack of success of modern wound dressings and
Received in revised form 23rd increased instances of non-healing skin wounds have ultimately paved the way for searching for
April, 2022 biomaterials in wound dressing. Microbial Cellulose successfully addresses all these issues mainly
due to high water holding capacity and biocompatibility. One of the major challenges in Microbial
Accepted 7th May, 2022
Cellulose production is its low yield in bacterial cells and thus secondary materials have been
Published online 28th June, 2022
sought. This has led to increased scientific work in combining Microbial Cellulose with Nanofibers
Keywords: and Hydrogels. Additionally, the performance of Microbial Cellulose has been reported to be
increased with the incorporation of Mesenchymal Stem Cells or using combined therapies of
Microbial Cellulose (MC) Wound Healing irradiation. The purpose of this review is to summarize all the recent advances in Microbial
Wound Dressing Cellulose as a wound-healing material either with or without other secondary materials with detailed
mechanisms. Clinical performance and prospects have also been outlined.

Copyright © Nainika Srivastava et al, 2022, this is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons
Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is
properly cited.

INTRODUCTION
Human skin covers the entire surface of the body, which is the
barrier between the human body and the outside world. It
affects the environment and plays an important role in
preventing pathogens from invading the human body[1]. But it
is the most commonly injured part of the human body. When
injured, the connective tissue is exposed, triggering a series of
local cell and biochemical events that restore their integrity[2].
The first reaction after an injury is to stop bleeding. It occurs at
the site of blood loss in the wound [3]. The second stage is
inflammation which lasts from 24 hours to 4-6 days, beginning
with the release of proteolytic enzymes and pro-inflammatory
cytokines from invasive immune cells into the wound area,
where these inflammatory cells are reactive oxygen species
(ROS) and it protects the organisms from bacterial infections
[4]. At this stage, all foreign bodies anddebris are removed
from the wound bed by neutrophils and macrophages,
preventing infection [5]. In addition, the release of cytokines
and enzymes stimulates the growth of fibroblasts and
myofibroblasts, and wound exudate provides the water needed
for healing [6,7]. The third stage is the proliferation stage
where new granulation tissue is formed and grows in the
wound area to form a new extracellular matrix. The final stage
of healing is remodeling. At this stage, the composition of the
matrix changes, collagen III replaces collagen I, and the tensile
strength of the new tissue increases [3, 6, 8]. [Figure 1]
The skin has many functions, such as protecting other organs
from pathogen invasion, dehydration, mechanical impact,
radiation, and chemicals. The skin also regulates body
temperature and is an integral part of the sensory system,
serving as a reservoir of vitamin D synthesis [9,10]. Therefore,
skin damage needs to be properly treated not only to restore its
appearance but also to restore its function as described above.
Therefore, special attention has been paid to the development
of biomaterials/structures suitable for wound care/healing[11].
The global wound care market was valued at US $ 17.49 billion
in 2021. The market is projected to grow from US $ 18.51
billion in 2022 to the US $ 28.23 billion in 2029, showing a
CAGR of 6.2% over the forecast period [12].
In addition, of the various commercially available wound
care/biomaterials, wound dressings are the most widely used.
Various forms of wound dressings have been developed,
including clear bandages, medical bandages, hydrogel
bandages, foam bandages, hydrophilic colloid bandages, and
film bandages [13,14,15].
Wound dressings play an essential role in the healing of some
types of open wounds, like chronic wounds, unless the moist,
warm, and nutritious environment of the wound bed creates
ideal conditions for microbial growth. Thus, the wound healing
process can be hampered by bacterial colonization and

*Corresponding author: Nainika Srivastava

Department of Biotechnology, Heritage Institute of Technology, Kolkata 700107, India
 International Journal of Recent Scientific Research Vol. 13, Issue, 06 (A), pp. 1388-1400, June, 2022

subsequent infection, which can induce an excessive and
prolonged inflammatory response from the host tissue[16].
It is very important that the ideal wound dressing matches its
biocompatibility and bio-physicochemical properties. Most
natural polymers are biocompatible, but often have poor me
chanical properties and poor processability [17,18]. Cellulose-
based biomaterials are not only poorly biocompatible but their
physical, chemical, and mechanical properties are controlled.
Various types of wound dressings have been developed from
cellulose-based biomaterials and have shown promising results
[19,20]. One such cellulose-based biomaterial is the Microbial
Cellulose (MC) which exhibits appropriate biocompatibility
and biodegradability and has MC's unique physical and
chemical properties such as ultrafine nanofiber network, high
crystallinity, high water retention, high tensile strength, so it is
a biomaterial for wound healing[21].
This review’s primary focus is to provide a comprehensive
assessment of MC-based wound healing where we will
elucidate the pathophysiology and the process of wound
healing and the challenges related to it. Finally, MC based
wound healing system is reviewed, their strategies of
enhancement, clinical performance, and marketed products are
discussed, and the future perspectives are presented.
microbial cellulose can be tuned to have certain desired
properties. For example, the bacterium Acetobacter xylinum is
noted for its unique mechanical properties and its application in
[24].
biotechnology, microbiology, and materials science
General Biochemical Pathway for Cellulose Synthesis
The synthesis of microbial cellulose is a multi-step process
[Figure 2] involving two major mechanisms. The synthesis of
uridine diphosphoglucose (UDPGIc) is followed by the
polymerization of glucose into a long non-branched chain (β1
→ 4 glucan chain) by cellulose synthase. The details of
cellulose synthesis are widely documented [26,27]. The former
mechanism is well known, but the latter has not yet been
investigated. The formation of UDPGIc begins with carbon
compounds (hexose, glycerol, dihydroxyacetone, pyruvate,
dicarboxylic acid, etc.) entering the Krebs cycle,
gluconeogenesis, r pentose phosphate pathway, depending on
the available carbon sources. It is then catalyzed and
phosphorylated, followed by isomerization of the intermediate.
This process, known as UDPGIc pyrophosphorylase, converts
the compound to UDPGIc, a precursor to cellulose production.

Fig 1 Stages of Wound Healing

The stages include- (a) Hemostasis, which is clotting of the blood; (b) Inflammation, where the release ofproteolytic enzymes and protection of
organism from microbial infections with the help of neutrophils and macrophages takes place; (c) Proliferation, where the formation of new
granulation tissue occurs; (d) Remodelling, where the composition of matrix changes and new tissue is formed.(Created by Biorender,22)

Cellulose
Microbial cellulose is an organic compound produced by
certain types of microorganisms (bacteria), predominantly
Acetobacter, Sarcina ventriculi, and Agrobacterium. Microbial
cellulose is characterized by high purity, strength, malleability,
and improved water retention [23]. In natural habitats, most
microorganisms (bacteria) synthesize extracellular
polysaccharides such as cellulose to form a protective cover
around the cells. Although microbial cellulose is produced in
nature, many methods are currently being explored as a large-
scale process to promote cellulose growth from laboratory
cultures. By controlling the synthetic process, the resulting
The polymerization of glucose into the β1→4 glucan chain has
been hypothesized to either involve a lipid intermediate [28] or
not involve a lipid intermediate,[26] though structural
enzymology studies and in vitro experiments indicate that
polymerization can occur by direct enzymatic transfer of a
glucosyl moiety from a nucleotide sugar to the growing
polysaccharide[29]. A. xylinum usually converts carbon
compounds into cellulose with around 50% efficiency[28].
Structure of Microbial Cellulose
The MC consists of twisted ribbon-shaped fibrils
approximately 50100 nm wide and 38 nm thick [30, 31, 32,
33]. X-ray diffraction (XRD) shows that the size of microfibrils
1389 | P a g e
Nainika Srivastava et al., The Potential of Wound Healing By Microbial Cellulose
is associated with their crystallite size [34]. These ultrafine
ribbons are 19 μm long and form densely arranged structures
stabilized by extensive bonds between and within hydrogen
[35,36]. The average distance (pore diameter) between the
junctions of a typical MC film is calculated to be 0.523 ± 0.273
μm, and the direction of the segment as the average angle
formed between the x-axis and the segment is 85.64 ± 0.56 °
[37].
Fig 2 Biochemical Pathway for Cellulose Synthesis[25]
Synthesis of microbial cellulose is a multi-step process involving the synthesis
of uridine diphosphoglucose (UDPGlc) followed by polymerization of glucose
into β1 → 4 glucan chain by cellulose synthase.
Cellulose produced under static conditions produces a leather-
like membrane that supports a population of cells of the
xylinum species. These pellicles[Figure 3]are composed of
overlapping and intertwined cellulose ribbons that form a grid
of parallel but chaotic planes [23].
Fig 3 MC Pellicle [38]
A wet microbial cellulose pellicle being removed from a culture.
Adjacent strands of cellulose mats branch and connect to a
greater extent than is common in static cultures, compared to
cellulose produced in agitated cultures. Under agitated
conditions, increased branching is observed in the form of
fibrous strands and irregular particles that are completely
dispersed in the culture broth [39]. In addition, moving MCs
combine to form a grid-like pattern [40]. The schematic MC
microfibril model and its physical properties are shown in the
figure[Figure 4].
Fig 4 Microbial Cellulose microfibrils and its physical properties [51,52]
(a)Schematic diagram of Microbial Cellulosemicrofibrils;
(b)Physical properties of Microbial Cellulose
Pathophysiology of Wounds
Wound healing is a complex, multi-step, multifactorial process
that includes: various cells, signals, and biochemicals. Wound
healing stages include hemostasis, inflammation, proliferation,
and remodeling, in which different cells and signals/stimuli are
involved.
When cell integrity is compromised ortissue is destroyed,
physical, mechanical, or metabolic problems cause wounds
[41], which destroy the function of the skin. Wound healing is
a complex process as many factors can affect the wound,
including the type of wound (e.g., dry, acute, chronic, and
exudate) and the patient's condition (e.g., anemia and diabetes).
The classification of skin scars is either chronic or chronic
acute and depends on the nature of the healing process during
that period. Burns and incisions cause acute wounds. Here, the
healing bond is related to the number of skins layer andskin
size [42,43]. Wounds are normal with the development of
hypertrophic scars (HS) known as a fibroproliferative disorder.
Hypertrophic scars are confined to the edges of the original
wound bed and keloids extend beyond these boundaries. It is
believed that excessive movement across joints, underlying
bone structure, or excessive tension due to loss of tissue can
play a role in the development of these particular scars. Keloids
are also common in patients with dark skin[44,45].
The exact mechanism by which these scars are formed is
unknown, but abnormal or hyperactive fibroblasts have been
found in keloids. These fibroblasts produce large amounts of
collagen, elastin, fibronectin, and proteoglycans and overreact
to stimuli. This response may be associated with the
upregulation of insulin-like growth factor receptors on keloid
fibroblasts. Insulin-like growth factor stimulates collagen
production. Unlike normal scars, the collagen deposited on
keloids is randomized and may play a role in extending beyond
the edges of the wound[44,45].
Hypertrophic scar collagen is bundled and arranged in a wavy
pattern parallel to the epithelial surface. This slightly organized
pattern distinguishes hypertrophic scars from the disordered
alignment found in keloids. Unlike keloid fibroblasts,
hypertrophic scar fibroblasts usually respond to growth factors
and producea slight excess of collagen. Hypertrophic scars also
contain the unique modular structure of alpha-smooth muscle
actin myofibroblasts, as well as those involved in scar
contraction. Hypertrophic scars are thought to heal over time,
but keloids do not[44,45].
1390 | P a g e
 International Journal of Recent Scientific Research Vol. 13, Issue, 06 (A), pp. 1388-1400,
1400, June, 2022

The Rate off Healing Is Calculated As Equation [46]:
Percentage of Healing (%)
Wound area on a particular day
=1 − ×100
Wound area on day zero
The normal mechanism of wound healing may be interrupted
due to various factors that prolong healing time[47].time For
example, for severe chronic wounds, physiological changes can
occur in the wound, which produces excess exudate that
destroys tissue proteases from wound contamination [48].
moreover, chronic wounds, burns, and diabetic ulcers are on
the rise at the time of relaxation.
elaxation. High levels of exudate are one
example. Found in burns, this provides a favorable
environment for bacterial growth [49].. The presence of these
bacteria causes wound inflammation through pro-inflammatory
pro
manifestations of cytokines [50].. The degree of inflammation
prevents the formation of granulation tissue in the wound area
from degradable due to high metalloproteinase (MMP)
content.ECM components and resulting in delayed wound
healing[53].. In addition, diabetic wounds show dilation healing
time due to dry, insensitive properties. Therefore, diabetic
wounds are prone to skin infections [54].
Wound Healing Challenges- The Microbial Contamination
Bacteria can naturallycolonize both biological and non-
non
biological surfaces [55].. When microorganisms settle in a
patient with severe burns, the immune system can be
compromised andthe skin barrier can be physically
physica destroyed
[56].
Open wounds provide a suitable environment for bacterial
colonization [57].. Open wounds are usually contaminated with
pathogens from the environment
environment[58]. Gram-positive bacteria
predominate in the early stages of chronic wound formation,
while Gram-negative
negative bacteria are found deep in the skin and
cause significant tissue damage [59]. Bacterial infections are
the most common clinical complications associated with skin
diseases and play an important role in delaying the healing
process [56]In
In addition, it causeshighmorbidity and mortality
inpatients [60]. Therefore,
re, skin function should be restored by
immediate covering with a wound dressing to prevent
contamination and promote skin healing [61]. To this end,
natural and synthetic wound dressings with antibacterial
properties have been developedloped in various forms such as
sponges, hydrogels, foils, and membranes.
Wound Healing Using Mc
In 1980, Farah and Ring first reported the use of MC as a
wound dressing material [62,63]
,63]. In vivo experiments revealed
that MC films reduced inflammation along with suitable wound
protection propertiesmaking it an excellent material for wound
dressing and in making artificial skin in comparison to skin
grafting [64]. Other
ther wound dressings and healing properties
include high water-holding
holding capacity, excellent gas, and liquid
permeability, and tissue biocompatibility [65,66]. MC can be
very effective in burn wounds because it also has better heat
absorption and pain reduction.

Fig 5 MC based Nanofibers & Hydrogels

1. MC based Nanofiber: Here, first silver nanoparticle is prepared and then it is combined with bacterial cellulose. The comb
combination is utilized to make
Nanofiber Composites. Thereafter, they are directly applied to the wounded site. This allows the slow and continuous release of silver nanoparticles at the
wounded site which has significant antimicrobial properties. 2. MC based Hydrogels: Here, chitosan is first prepared from chichitin by deacetylation process. Next,
it is combined with microbial cellulose. Thereafter, it is crosslinked with glutaradehyde and loaded with specific antimicrobial drugs to make a hydrogel. On
application to the wounded site, the hydrogel releases the drugs and results in wound healing. (Crea
(Created with Biorender)

1391 | P a g e
Nainika Srivastava et al., The Potential of Wound Healing By Microbial Cellulose
The pain can be diminished by proper moisture control at the
wounded site thereby retaining the humidity at the wounded
site and preventing dehydration of the wound dressing has
inspired renewed interest among researchers [67,68].
Combination of MC and Nanofibers
Two most common strategies used in MC based wound healing
applications are (i) the usage of MC nanofibrous shape loaded
with a model drug or antibacterial nanoparticles, and (ii)
nanofibrous dressing in which MC is mixed with some other
herbal or synthetic polymers without or with chemical or
bodily modifications [69-72]. Being a biocompatible
biomaterial, MC has been combined with silver nanoparticles
which have antimicrobial properties to make nanofiber
composites [73]. The slow and continual release of silver
nanoparticles was not at all harmful to human cells but instead
has prolonged antimicrobial activity [74,75]. [Figure 5]
Combination of MC And Hydrogels
Hydrogels find extensive use in wound healing applications
since they have high water holding capacity, can be easily
loaded with drugs along with embedded skin cells, and have
been shown to have no adverse inflammatory response
[76,77,78]. In vitro experiments were carried out by either
loading human epidermal keratinocytes with-based hydrogels
[79] or by fabricating semi-interpreting networks (semi-IPN)
hydrogels on MC and chitosan and subsequent wound healing
efficiency was analyzed [80]. The results revealed proper
thermal and mechanical stability, significant anti-bacterial
activity along with an overall acceleration in wound healing
[79,80].[Figure 5]
Performance of MC Based Wound Dressing- In Vivo And In
Vitro
In vitro experiments had been carried out by many researchers.
Volova et al. had loaded the fibroblast cells on 3-
hydroxybutyric and 4-hydroxybutyric acids P(3HB/4HB)/ MC
composite dressing film which prolonged wound healing
because of the vending of epidermal epithelization [81]. Apart
from this, in a Sprague Dawley rat, Mohamad et al. grafted AA
onto MC, and the MC/AA hydrogel expanded wound
recuperation and extended fibroblast proliferation and
epithelization in vivo [82]. Incorporating human epidermal
keratinocytes (HEK) and human dermal fibroblasts (HDF) into
MC/AA hydrogel improved the recuperation price and collagen
deposition, consistent with Mohamad et al [83]. In addition to
these, Moraes et al. found that incorporating collagen into the
MC membrane ended in higher wound recuperation and faster
tissue regeneration in rat dorsal wounds in vitro whilst as
compared to industrial collagenous ointment [84]. The
incorporation of HACC and CoL-I into MC was proven to
assist the proliferation and unfolding of NIH3T3 cells and
HUVECs [85]. Tang et al. have incorporated hyaluronic acid
(HA) into MC hydrogel and confirmed better L9292 cell
viability for MC/HA composite than MC alone which turned
attributed to the extended floor density and smoother floor [86].
In the case of in vivo experiments, it was Khan et al. who first
blended gelatin porogens with microporous regenerated
microbial cellulose (rMC), and the rMC/gelatin confirmed
higher wound closure and recovery of around 60% in
comparison to that of MC alone in vivo in C57BL/6 mice and
supported the adhesion and proliferation of human keratinocyte
cells (HaCaT) as compared to never-dried MC (ND-MC) [87].
Moreover, Kingkaew et al. have impregnated chitosan into
MC, and the MC/chitosan composite film displayed high
antibacterial skills and promoted the pores and skin
keratinocytes and fibroblasts at unique concentrations of
chitosan [88]. Thereafter, Li et al. delivered hyaluronan (HA)
to MC, and the MC/HA composite film speeded up recovery
and confirmed tremendous tissue restoration in Wistar rats in
vivo [89]. Not only this, butKeskin et al. also extensively
utilized impregnated keratin in MC, and the effects revealed
that keratinocytes and fibroblasts had been greater connected to
the composite dressing [90]. Apart from these, Radu et al.
included keratin in BCM, and the keratin/BCM aggregate
displayed regeneration potential in rabbits' dorsal burnt wounds
in vivo [91]. Lin et al. used dextran in an MC hydrogel and
located that it improved wound recovery in C57BL/6 mice in
vivo in comparison to a moist MC industrial dressing and a
dried film dressing called Tegaderm [92]. Qiao et al. included
arginine into microporous microbial cellulose (MOMC) and
proved that MC/arginine has a right-away position in wound
recovery via ways of means of improving fibroblast and
keratinocyte migration and proliferation [93]. In addition to
these, Farideh et al. included arginine into MC-primarily based
on nanofibers (MC-NF) and located that Arg/MCNF led to
quicker wound closure and recovery than MCNF alone. Better
reepithelization and angiogenesis had been attributed to this
[94]. Qiao et al. grafted arginine with microporous oxidized
MC (MOBC), which stepped forward fibroblast and endothelial
cell proliferation and migration [93]. Moreover, Lin et al.
located that including dextran in MC and creating an
MC/dextran hydrogel improved fibroblast cell proliferation and
hastened wound recovery in comparison to the use of moist
MC [94]. Silk sericin (SS) turned into included in the MC via
way of means of Lamboni et al., and the BC/SS composite
improved fibroblast film proliferation and wound recovery
[95]. Lin et al. used dextran in MC hydrogel and located that
moist MC industrial dressing and dried film called Tegaderm
slowed wound recovery in C57BL/6 mice in vivo [92].
Prospect of Using Mc In Wound Healing
Skin wound healing is a complicated process that involves
many distinct tissues, cell types, and matrix components
[96,97]. An ideal modern wound healing material should be
non-toxic, non-pyrogenic, biocompatible, able to provide a
barrier against infection and control fluid loss, reduce pain,
create and maintain a moist wound environment, easy
introduction of medicine to the wound, able to absorb exudates
during the inflammatory phase [98] should create an optimal
environment for epidermal regeneration [97-102]. MC has been
demonstrated to show all these properties and is hence
considered an ideal material in wound healing systems.
Methods to Improve the Performance of the Mc Based
Wound Healing
Incorporation of Mesenchymal Stem Cells (MSCS)
One of the most recent advances in wound healing research is
the incorporation of MSCs into MC structure to enhance the
efficacy of the wound healing system. In this regard, several
researchers tried and carried out a plethora of ways including
either introduction of Acrylic Acid (AA) into MC to make a
hydrogel and subsequent loading with Human Epidermal
1392 | P a g e
 International Journal of Recent Scientific Research Vol. 13, Issue, 06 (A), pp. 1388-1400, June, 2022
Keratinocytes (HEK) or Human Dermal Fibroblasts (HDF)
[103], or the seeding of Adipose Stem Cells (ADCs)
[104]/rabbit Bone Marrow Mesenchymal Stem Cells (rBMSCs)
[105]/human Urine-derived Stem Cells (hUSCs) [106] into MC
structure which significantly increased the healing rate and had
a faster tissue regeneration potential.
Immobilization of Growth Factors
This is another strategy adopted for increasing the performance
of MC-based wound healing material. By stimulating
angiogenesis and wound healing, the growth factors generated
by cells play a vital role in wound healing mechanisms as well
as in increased fibroblast activity [107], influenced by cellular
proliferation to accelerate the healing of the wound [108]. In
vivo experiments involved basic Fibroblast Growth Factor
(bFGF)/human Epidermal Growth Factor (hEGF)
[109]/Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor (VEGF) [110] on
MC hydrogel or scaffold with subsequent application to the
wounded site.[Figure 6]
Fig 6 MSCs and Growth factors incorporated Wound Healing
in Diabetic Foot Ulcer Treatment[111]
The figure illustrates the wound healing process in the Diabetic foot ulcer
treatment by incorporating mesenchymal stem cells and immobilizing growth
factors.
Nano- And Micropatterning
It is known from published works of literature that the micro
and nanoscale surface morphology of the ECM is responsible
for triggering physical signals which affect cellular interactions
[112]. The distribution and architecture of collagen in the ECM
also affect wound healing efficiency. Having known that,
scientists either patterned MC with 10µm stripes [112] or
modified the surface of porous micropatterned MC by arginine-
glycine-aspartate-serine (RGDS) which formed dense collagen
on the surface of Human Skin Fibroblasts (HSF) significantly
reduced scar size in in-vivo experiments leading to an
accelerated wound healing response [113].
Combined Therapies of MC and Irradiation
Grafting of AA on MC hydrogel using either electron beam
[114] or microwave irradiation significantly reduced the
adhesiveness of the wound dressing along with increased
wound closer rate and faster healing [115]. This led researchers
to conclude that the combination of MC with phototherapy
could accelerate the wound healing process [116-118].
Clinical Performance- Mc Based Wound Dressing In Drug
Delivery System
The MC-based wound dressing operates as a drug delivery
system (DDS) where various narcotics, as well as
macromolecules, are charged. An ordinarily high-level area, as
well as hydroxyl groups current, are able of intermolecular and
synthetic interactions are to the incorporation of large bio-
macromolecules and nanoparticles [119,120]. The micro-
porosity of MC structure gives slow-moving discharge of
narcotics within the clustered hurt with lengthy-permanent
antibiotic action against bacterial growth [121]. Though, that
ought to not influence the regular wound cure trial.
The natural feature is not enough to encounter the demand in
getting dressed materials. The MC acts as a physical barrier
against bacterial incursion and misses opposed-bacterial
qualities to impede bacterial infection itself[122,123] which
reduces the efficacy of MC in the therapy of highly polluted
cuts. As DDS, the effectiveness of MC could be upgraded by
taking advantage of H2O uptake to charge MC with
antimicrobial operatives like antibiotics[124]. For that goal,
anti-inflammatory and antimicrobial drugs like diclofenac as
well as ibuprofen[125], antibiotic nanomaterials like
silver(Ag+), Zinc Oxide(ZnO), graphene oxide(GO), as well as
titanium oxide(TiO2), as well as special polymers are generally
integrated within the MC-based wound treating[126,127,128].
Antimicrobial Nanomaterials
A few antimicrobial nanomaterials have been integrated within
MC wound dressing to increase efficacy. The Microbial
Cellulose (MC)/ZnO compound had more well-disposed
antibiotic features as well as cell adherence than pure MC[129].
Moreover, the MC/ZnO scaffold exposed substantial cure
effectiveness as well as tissue reclamation in the burn mic
model in vivo in Balbvermins than that of pure MC dressing
scaffold[130] because of antibiotic properties of Zn as well as
its affirmative strike proliferation of keratinocytes. The
ZnO/carboxyl MC membrane reduced wound closure, reducing
the inflammatory response in vivo in BalB/c vermins, and was
possibly found to be a non-irritant to the skin in vivo in the
dorsal skin of New Zealand pallid bunny[131]. That was
possibly by cause of antibiotic properties, which quick re-
epithelialization and wound contraction.
Antimicrobial Drugs
The charging of MC-based wound dressing with a few
antibiotic narcotics was used to increase the efficacy of MC-
based wound dressing. The planting of penicillin out upon the
restored microbial starch demonstrated great wound cure
effectiveness in vivo in females than in MC[132]. That was
owing to the antibiotic properties of the restored microbial
cellulose wound dressing. The charging of microbial cellulose
sheet with povi done-iodine(PI) as well as polihexamide
1393 | P a g e
Nainika Srivastava et al., The Potential of Wound Healing By Microbial Cellulose
(PHMB) showed both disinfectant properties as well as high
biocompatibility in human keratinocytes[133]. The charging of
MC with PHMB as well as polyethylene glycol(PEG)
demonstrated a quick wound cure capability for
PHMB/PEG/MC in vivo in vermins than other for-profit
wound dressings[134]. The fluconazole/never-desiccated
microbial cellulose membrane was highly capable of healing
incinerate cuts in vivo in Wistar rat cuts.
Antimicrobial Polymers
Certain special polymers with antibiotic qualities have been
used to better the efficacy of MC-based wound dressing. The
thymol/MC demonstrated considerably enhanced wound cure
effectiveness in Wistar rats in vivo as opposed to pure MC
scaffold[135]. That was possibly attributed to its antibiotic
properties, which reduced burning and improved hurt closing.
Opposed- Inflammatory Operative
The procedure of hurt cure is possibly energetic and
burdensome comprising different phases. The end product of
thrombin is possibly cyclooxygenase (COX-2), and its level is
possibly elevated after skin harm. That enhances the transfer
and proliferation of cells[136]. Brassolatti et al. possess
lidocaine on MC film and increased the resistant expression of
COX-2. Also, the skin appendices in the wound site
demonstrated a gentle inflammatory penetration, which
supported the wound burn cure[137]. The immobilization of
betulin diphosphate(BDP) as an anti-inflammatory agent on the
MC/ZnO exposed an efficient wound cure in vivo in Wistar
rats than MC which was ascribed to the combined effects of
marked down oxidative strain and governed oxygenation[138].
The charging of microbial cellulose with sericin along with
polyhexamethylene biguanide (PHMB) exposed that
MC/sericin/PHMB lowered ache and decreased the long-
standing burning in vivo in Wistar rats as opposed to for-profit
of it Bactigras[139].
Natural Therapeutics
Native products such as plants have possibly demonstrated a
tremendous good capability to be utilized in renewed getting
dressing materials[140]. The combination of Microbial starch
membrane with the propolis extract was possibly found to
showcase considerably higher cure capacity in vivo in diabetic
vermins role models for against-inflammatory functions and
backing in vivo epithelization [141]. Curcumin charging on
Microbial Cellulose(MC) considerably upgraded cure patterns
than MC in vivo in the Balbvermins wound burn model[142].
The micro colloidal Zanthoxylum acanthopodium(MZA) was
possibly charged on the MC filaments, as well as that
demonstrated a higher cure rate in vivo in tan rats than MC by
cause of improving vascularization as well as antibiotic
properties also as reduced inflammatory reactions[143]. The
incorporation of Vaccariaasegetalis extract (vaccarin), as well
as the MC membrane, demonstrated a faster wound cure in the
rat skin model in vivo than the MC membrane unique for the
forming of heavy newborn subcutaneous tissue as well as
squamous epithelium[144]. Further, the encapsulation of matrix
metalloproteinase 9 si-RNA (si-MMP-9) within the MC- hyper
branched cationic polysaccharide (MC-HCP) led to anapparent
wound cure rate in vivo rat diabetic wound[145].
Overview of Commercialisation Ability of the Mc for Wound
Care Products
The wound cure rate of sure functionalized Microbial starch-
based wound dressing is possibly pictured in the table of
contents given below. As per observation, the altered Microbial
cellulose-based wound dressing demonstrated a higher
percentage of hurt cure than pure MC-based wound treating,
commercial film dressing[146,147,148], gauze[149,150], as
well as silver sulfadiazine[151,152,153] as well as pure
MC[154,155,156]. Though functionalizedMC has possibly
shown possible supporting properties to be utilized as hurt
treatment, especially for burn cuts, there goes on a bit wound
dressings market akin bacterial nanocellulose[148], Nano-
skinas well as CelMat[157]. Despitestudies examining that the
function and modification of pure and simple Microbialstarch-
based for-profit products could increase their in-vitro as well as
in vivo cure rates as hurt treatment, there are alive hardly any
products. For instance, PHMB-functionalized MC got
acquainted as Suprasorb X has been commercialized as wound
dressing[158]. Another commercialized hurt treatment is
Biofill which was possibly utilized as interim skin, which
diminished infection, upgraded the cure rate, and lightened
ache[159]. Another commercialized interim skin is Membracel
for burns and sores. CommercializedxCellhas possibly
utilizedtreatment for venous ulceration cuts for ache ease as
well as quick granulation. Further, Nanoderm and Nanoderm
Ag have been efficient in stopping infections due to their
antimicrobial properties. Nanoskin was possibly covered by
longstanding cuts for suppressing the entry of microorganisms.
At last, the commercialized MC hurt treating CelMat has been
demoed to delete wreckage after tidying[160,161].
Future Prospects & Conclusion
The hurt cure is a complicated, energetic procedure with
various taking part in cells, biochemical molecules, as well as
signaling pathways. A few endogenous, as well as exogenous
impeding elements, influence the procedure, like severe
inflammatory responses, pathogenic corruptions, wound bed
parchedness, ambers, as well as oxygen permeability. The
passive wound cure/treating biomaterials exclusively serve as
the bodily constructions, which avoid microbial incursion as
well as fine-tune the wound bed's humidity at the optimal
situation. Wounds akin to infected hurt, diabetic sores, as well
incinerated wounds, need bodily care as well as organic
interventions which are non-existent with the idle hurt-
cure/treating biomaterials.
Microbial-cellulose-based biomaterials are possibly efficient
for the cure of wounds for their diversification, tuneable bodily,
synthetic, automatic, and biological acts, convenience, price
rise, and biocompatibility. Cellulose-based biocompoundsare
glamorous for wound-cure/treating materials because of their
process ability to numerous structures like nano/microfibers,
hydrogels, and colloids. Their hydrophilic nature has been used
to fine-tune the performance of different naturesas well as a
fabricated hurt cure or otherwise treating materials. A few
bioactive molecules similar to sooner drugs, vitamins, growth
elements, peptides, as well as native materials have been
brought to the wound site by applying starch-based structures.
The biodegradation of MC-based biomaterials is possibly
challenging, which is possibly nota biggie for wound
1394 | P a g e
 International Journal of Recent Scientific Research Vol. 13, Issue, 06 (A), pp. 1388-1400, June, 2022
cure/treating applications. They are readily taken out from the
wound bed after causing the needed effect.
The application of venomous crosslinking operatives is about
interest in making biocompatible cellulose-based hydrogels.
Accordingly, the development of secure, efficacious, and
biocompatible cross linking approaches is possibly needed for
the manufacturing of hydrogel-based biomaterials with
convenient physicochemical as well as biological features. The
combination of cell healing notion with starch-based wound-
cure biomaterials as the cell-charged structures is possibly
giving hope to intensify the cure trial in long-standing wounds.
Declaration
The authors declare that they have equal contributions to the
completion of this paper. Figures1 and 5 have been created by
the authors by using the Biorender application
(https://biorender.com/). They have no competing interests.
The guidance of our professor, Dr. Nandan Kumar Jana and the
support of the Department of Biotechnology, Heritage Institute
of Technology, Kolkata is gratefully acknowledged. This work
has received no specific grant from any funding agency.
References
1. Byrd, A. L., Belkaid, Y., and Segre, J. A. (2018). The
human skin microbiome. Nat.Rev. Microbiol. 16, 143–
155.
2. PRFS Moraes, S Saska, H Barud, LR Lima, VCA
Martins, AMG Plepis, SJL Ribeiro, AMM Gaspar
(2016). Bacterial Cellulose/ Collagen Hydrogel for
Wound Healing. Materials Research. 2016; 19(1): 106-
116
3. Sinno, H., and Prakash, S. (2013). Complements and the
wound healing cascade:an updated review. Plast. Surg.
Int. 2013:146764.
4. Thomason, H. A., Lovett, J. M., Spina, C. J.,
Stephenson, C., Mcbain, A. J., andHardman, M. J.
(2018). Silver oxysalts promote cutaneous wound
healingindependent of infection. Wound Repair Regen.
26, 144–152. DOI: 10.1111/wrr.12627
5. Minutti, C. M., Knipper, J. A., Allen, J. E., and Zaiss, D.
M. W. (2017). Tissue-specificcontribution of
macrophages to wound healing. Semin. Cell Dev. Biol.
61, 3–11. DOI: 10.1016/j.semcdb.2016.08.006
6. Das, S., and Baker, A. B. (2016). Biomaterials and
nanotherapeutics for enhancingskin wound healing.
Front. Bioeng. Biotechnol. 4:82. DOI:
10.3389/fbioe.2016. 00082
7. Suarato, G., Bertorelli, R., and Athanassiou, A. (2018).
Borrowing from nature:biopolymers and biocomposites
as smart wound care materials. Front. Bioeng.
Biotechnol. 6:137. DOI: 10.3389/fbioe.2018.00137
8. Bielefeld, K. A., Amini-Nik, S., and Alman, B. A.
(2013). Cutaneous wound healing:recruiting
developmental pathways for regeneration. Cell. Mol.
Life Sci. 70, 2059–2081. DOI: 10.1007/s00018-012-
1152-9
9. Cañedo-Dorantes, L.; Cañedo-Ayala, M. Skin acute
wound healing: A comprehensive review. Int. J.
Inflamm. 2019, 2019, 3706315.
10. Joodaki, H.; Panzer, M.B. Skin mechanical properties
and modeling: A review. Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng. Part H
2018, 232, 323–343.
11. Gonzalez, A.C.d.O.; Costa, T.F.; Andrade, Z.d.A.;
Medrado, A.R.A.P. Wound healing-A literature review.
An. Bras. Dermatol. 2016,91, 614–620.
12. https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.fortunebusinessins
ights.com/amp/wound-care-market-103268
13. Nour, S.; Baheiraei, N.; Imani, R.; Khodaei, M.;
Alizadeh, A.; Rabiee, N.; Moazzeni, S.M. A review of
accelerated wound healingapproaches Biomaterial-
assisted tissue remodeling. J. Mater. Sci. Mater. Med.
2019, 30, 120.
14. Ehterami, A.; Salehi, M.; Farzamfar, S.; Samadian, H.;
Vaez, A.; Sahrapeyma, H.; Ghorbani, S. A promising
wound dressing basedon alginate hydrogels containing
vitamin D3 cross-linked by calcium carbonate/d-
glucono--lactone. Biomed. Eng. Lett. 2020,10, 309.
15. Mohammadinejad, R.; Maleki, H.; Larrañeta, E.;
Fajardo, A.R.; Nik, A.B.; Shavandi, A.; Sheikhi, A.;
Ghorbanpour, M.; Farokhi,M.; Govindh, P. Status and
future scope of plant-based green hydrogels in
biomedical engineering. Appl. Mater. Today 2019,
16,213–246.
16. Gallant-Behm CL, Yin HQ, Liu S, Heggers JP, Langford
RE, Olson ME, Hart DA, Burrell RE. Comparison of in
vitro disc diffusion and time kill-kinetic assays for the
evaluation of antimicrobial wound dressing efficacy.
Wound Repair and Regeneration. 2005;13(4):412–421.
17. Obagi, Z.; Damiani, G.; Grada, A.; Falanga, V.
Principles of wound Dressings: A Review. Surg.
Technol. Int. 2019, 35, 35.
18. Zhong, Y.; Xiao, H.; Seidi, F.; Jin, Y. Natural Polymer-
Based Antimicrobial Hydrogels without Synthetic
Antibiotics asWoundDressings. Biomacromolecules
2020, 21, 2983–3006.
19. Abdul Khalil, H.; Adnan, A.; Yahya, E.B.; Olaiya, N.;
Safrida, S.; Hossain, M.; Balakrishnan, V.; Gopakumar,
D.A.; Abdullah,C.; Oyekanmi, A. A Review on plant
cellulose nanofibre-based aerogels for biomedical
applications. Polymers 2020, 12, 1759.
20. Rana, A.K.; Frollini, E.; Thakur, V.K. Cellulose
nanocrystals: Pre-treatments, preparation strategies, and
surface functionalization.Int. J. Biol. Macromol. 2021,
182, 1554–1581.
21. Y. Li, M. Lin, and J. W. Davenport, “Ab initio studies
ofcellulose I: crystal structure, intermolecular forces,
and interactions with water,” The Journal of Physical
Chemistry C, vol. 115, no. 23, pp. 11533–11539, 2011.
22. Created with the Biorender app
23. Jonas, R.; Farah, Luiz F. (1998). "Production and
application of microbial cellulose". Polymer
Degradation and Stability. 59 (1–3): 101–106.
doi:10.1016/S0141-3910(97)00197-3.
24. Iguchi, M.; Yamanaka, S.; Budhiono, A. (2000).
"Bacterial cellulose' a masterpiece of nature's arts".
Journal of Materials Science. 35 (2): 261–270.
Bibcode:2000JMatS.
35..261I.doi:10.1023/A:1004775229149.
1395 | P a g e
Nainika Srivastava et al., The Potential of Wound Healing By Microbial Cellulose
25. By Initialdpw - Own work, CC BY-SA 3.0,
https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=174
38899
26. Brown, Jr (1987). "The biosynthesis of cellulose". Food
Hydrocolloids. 1 (5–6): 345–351. doi:10.1016/S0268-
005X(87)80024-3.
27. Delmer, D.P.; Amor, Y. (1995). "Cellulose
biosynthesis". Plant Cell. 7 (7): 987–1000.
doi:10.1105/tpc.7.7.987. PMC 160898. PMID 7640530.
28. Iannino, N.I. De; Couso, R.O.; Dankert, M.A. (1998).
"Lipid-linked intermediates and the synthesis of acetan
in Acetobacter xylinum". J. Gen. Microbiol. 134: 1731–
1736. doi:10.1099/00221287-134-6-1731.
29. Morgan, Jacob L. W.; McNamara, Joshua T.; Fischer,
Michael; Rich, Jamie; Chen, Hong-Ming; Withers,
Stephen G.; Zimmer, Jochen (2016). "Observing
cellulose biosynthesis and membrane translocation in
crystallo". Nature. 531 (7594): 329–334.
doi:10.1038/nature16966
30. Astley, O.M., Chanliaud, E., Donald, A.M., Gidley,
M.J., 2003. Tensile deformation of bacterialcellulose
composites. International Journal of Biological
Macromolecules 32(1), 28-35.
31. Brown, R.M., Willison, J.H., Richardson, C.L., 1976.
Cellulose biosynthesis in Acetobacter
xylinum:visualization of the site of synthesis and direct
measurement of the in vivo process. Proceedings of the
National Academy of Sciences of the United States of
America 73(12), 4565-4569.
32. Yamanaka, S., Sugiyama, J., 2000. Structural
modification of bacterial cellulose. Cellulose 7(3),213-
225.
33. Zaar, K., 1977. The biogenesis of cellulose by
Acetobacter xylinum. Cytobiologie 16, 1-15.
34. Haase, J., Hosemann, R., Renwanz, B., 1974. X-ray
wide and small-angle X-ray examinations oncellulose.
Colloid and Polymer Science 252(9), 712-717.
35. Bielecki, S., Krystynowicz, A., Turkiewicz, M.,
Kalinowska, H., 2005. Bacterial Cellulose,Biopolymers
Online. Wiley-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, pp.
40-43.
36. Esa, F., Tasirin, S.M., Rahman, N.A., 2014. Overview of
bacterial cellulose production andapplication.
Agriculture and Agricultural Science Procedia
2(Supplement C), 113-119.
37. J Grande, C., Torres, F., Gómez, C., TroncosoHeros, O.,
Canet-Ferrer, J., Martinez-Pastor, J.,
2008.Morphological characterization of bacterial
cellulose-starch nanocomposites. Polymers and Polymer
Composites 16(4), 181-185.
38. By User:Lightenoughtotravel - Own work by the
original uploader, Public Domain,
https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=454
46980
39. Vandamme, E.J., De Baets, S., Vanbaelen, A., Joris, K.,
De Wulf, P., 1998. Improved production ofbacterial
cellulose and its application potential. Polymer
Degradation and Stability 59(1), 93-99.
40. Watanabe, K., Tabuchi, M., Morinaga, Y., Yoshinaga,
F., 1998. Structural features and propertiesof bacterial
cellulose produced in agitated culture. Cellulose 5(3),
187-200.
41. A. A. Chaudhari, K. Vig, D. R. Baganizi, et al., “Future
prospects for scaffolding methods and biomaterials in
skin tissue engineering: a review,” International Journal
of Molecular Sciences, vol. 17, no. 12, p. 1974, 2016.
42. K. Vig, A. Chaudhari, S. Tripathi, et al., “Advances in
skinregeneration using tissue engineering,” International
Journal of Molecular Sciences, vol. 18, no. 4, p. 789,
2017.
43. S. Dhivya, V. V. Padma, and E. Santhini, “Wound
dressings -a review,” Biomedicine (Taipei), vol. 5, no. 4,
pp. 1–5, 2015.
44. Alster TS, Tanzi EL. Hypertrophic scars and keloids:
etiology and management. Am J Clin Dermatol.
2003;4(4):235-43.
45. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK518964/
46. A. Khalid, R. Khan, M. Ul-Islam, T. Khan, and F.
Wahid, “Bacterial cellulose-zinc oxide nanocomposites
as a novel dressing system for burn wounds,”
Carbohydrate Polymers, vol. 164, pp. 214–221, 2017.
47. G. B. Pitzer and K. G. Patel, “Proper care of early
wounds tooptimize healing and prevent complications,”
Facial Plastic Surgery Clinics of North America, vol. 19,
no. 3, pp. 491 504, 2011.
48. J. S. Boateng, K. H. Matthews, H. N. E. Stevens, and G.
M.Eccleston, “Wound healing dressings and drug
delivery systems: a review,” Journal of Pharmaceutical
Sciences, vol. 97, no. 8, pp. 2892–2923, 2008.
49. J. Lu, M. Yang, M. Zhan, et al., “Antibiotics for treating
infected burn wounds,” The Cochrane Database of
Systematic Reviews, vol. 2017, 2017.
50. D. Church, S. Elsayed, O. Reid, B. Winston, and R.
Lindsay, “Burn wound infections,” Clinical
microbiology reviews, vol. 19, pp. 403–434, 2006.
51. M. Edirinsinghe, J. Ahmed, and M. Gultekinoglu,
“Bacterial Cellulose Micro- Nano Fibres for Wound
Healing Applications”
52. https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/10096282/9/Edirisin
ghe_JBA-D-20-00094_R1.pdf
53. Hussain, Z., Sajjad, W., Khan, T., Wahid, F.J.C., 2019.
Production of bacterial cellulose fromindustrial wastes: a
review. Cellulose 26(5), 2895-2911.
54. R. Edwards and K. G. Harding, “Bacteria and wound
healing,” Current opinion in infectious diseases, vol. 17,
pp. 91– 96, 2004.
55. S. Laube, “Skin infections and aging,” Ageing
researchreviews, vol. 3, pp. 69–89, 2004.
56. S. R. Shah, F. K. Kasper, and A. G. Mikos,
“Perspectives onthe prevention and treatment of
infection for orthopedic tissue engineering applications,”
Chinese Science Bulletin, vol. 58, pp. 4342–4348, 2013.
57. H. Calum, C. Moser, P. Ø. Jensen et al., “Thermal
injuryinduces impaired function in polymorphonuclear
neutrophil granulocytes and reduced control of burn
wound infection,” Clinical & Experimental
Immunology, vol. 156, no. 1, pp. 102–110, 2009.
58. V. Sukumaran and S. Senanayake, “Bacterial skin and
soft tissueinfections,” Australian prescriber, vol. 39, p.
159, 2016.
59. O. Sarheed, A. Ahmed, D. Shouqair, and J. Boateng,
“Antimicrobial dressings for improving wound healing,”
Wound Healing-New Insights into Ancient Challenges,
V.Alexandrescu, Ed., pp. 373–398, 2016.
1396 | P a g e
 International Journal of Recent Scientific Research Vol. 13, Issue, 06 (A), pp. 1388-1400, June, 2022
60. A. F. Cardona and S. E. Wilson, “Skin and soft-
tissueinfections: a critical review and the role of
telavancin in their treatment,” Clinical Infectious
Diseases, vol. 61, suppl 2, pp. S69–S78, 2015.
61. N. Woodford and D. M. Livermore, “Infections caused
byGram-positive bacteria: a review of the global
challenge,” Journal of Infection, vol. 59, pp. S4–S16,
2009.
62. A. D. Metcalfe and M. W. Ferguson, “Tissue
engineering of replacement skin: the crossroads of
biomaterials, wound healing, embryonic development,
stem cells, and regeneration,” Journal of the Royal
Society Interface, vol. 4, no. 14, pp. 413–437, 2007.
63. L. F. Farah, Process for the preparation of cellulose film,
cellulose film produced thereby, artificial skin graft and
its use, Google Patents, 1990.
64. D. F. Ring, W. Nashed, and T. Dow, Liquid loaded pad
for medical applications, Google Patents, 1986
65. L. Fu, Y. Zhang, C. Li et al., “Skin tissue repair
materials from bacterial cellulose by a multilayer
fermentation method,” Journal of Materials Chemistry,
vol. 22, pp. 12349–12357, 2012.
66. W. Czaja, A. Krystynowicz, S. Bielecki, and R. M.
Brown, “Microbial cellulose—the natural power to heal
wounds,” Biomaterials, vol. 27, pp. 145–151, 2006.
67. N. Shah, M. Ul-Islam, W. A. Khattak, and J. K. Park,
“Overview of bacterial cellulose composites: a
multipurpose advanced material,” Carbohydrate
Polymers, vol. 98, pp. 1585–1598, 2013.
68. Agarwal, J. McAnulty, M. Schurr, C. Murphy, and N.
Abbott, “Polymeric materials for chronic wound and
burn dressings,” in Advanced Wound Repair Therapies,
D. Farrar, Ed., pp. 186–208, Woodhead Publishing,
2011.
69. L. G. Ovington, “Advances in wound dressings,” Clinics
in Dermatology, vol. 25, pp. 33–38, 2007.
70. Sulaeva, I.; Henniges, U.; Rosenau, T.; Potthast, A.
Bacterial cellulose as a material for wound treatment:
Properties and modifications: A review. Biotechnol.
Adv. 2015, 33, 1547–1571.
71. SureshKumar, M.; Siswanto, D.Y.; Lee, C.K. Magnetic
antimicrobial nanocomposite based on bacterial
cellulose and silver nanoparticles. J. Mater. Chem. 2010,
20, 6948–6955.
72. Pal, S.; Nisi, R.; Stoppa, M.; Licciulli, A. Silver-
Functionalized Bacterial Cellulose as Antibacterial
Membrane for Wound-Healing Applications. ACS
Omega 2017, 2, 3632–3639.
73. Azarniya, A.; Eslahi, N.; Mahmoudi, N.; Simchi, A.
Effect of graphene oxide nanosheets on the
physicomechanical properties of chitosan/bacterial
cellulose nanofibrous composites. Compos. An Appl.
Sci. Manuf. 2016, 85, 113–122.
74. Jiang, F.; Yin, L.; Yu, Q.; Zhong, C.; Zhang, J. Bacterial
cellulose nanofibrous membrane as a thermal stable
separator for lithium-ion batteries. J. Power Sources
2015, 279, 21–27.
75. Maneerung, T.; Tokura, S.; Rujiravanit, R. Impregnation
of silver nanoparticles into bacterial cellulose for
antimicrobial wound dressing. Carbohydr. Polym. 2008,
72, 43–51.
76. Wu, J.; Zheng, Y.; Song, W.; Luan, J.; Wen, X.; Wu, Z.;
Chen, X.; Wang, Q.; Guo, S. In situ synthesis of silver-
nanoparticles/bacterial cellulose composites for slow-
released antimicrobial wound dressing. Carbohydr.
Polym. 2014, 102, 762–771.
77. Lin, S.P.; Kung, H.N.; Tsai, Y.S.; Tseng, T.N.; Hsu,
K.D.; Cheng, K.C. Novel dextran modified bacterial
cellulose hydrogel accelerating cutaneous wound
healing. Cellulose 2017, 24, 4927–4937.
78. Favi, P.M.; Benson, R.S.; Neilsen, N.R.; Hammonds,
R.L.; Bates, C.C.; Stephens, C.P.; Dhar, M.S. Cell
proliferation, viability, and in vitro differentiation of
equine mesenchymal stem cells seeded on bacterial
cellulose hydrogel scaffolds. Mater. Sci. Eng. C 2013,
33, 1935–1944.
79. Fricain, J.C.; Granja, P.L.; Barbosa, M.A.; de Jéso, B.;
Barthe, N.; Baquey, C. Cellulose phosphates as
biomaterials. In vivo biocompatibility studies.
Biomaterials 2002, 23, 971–980.
80. Loh, E.Y.X.; Mohamad, N.; Fauzi, M.B.; Ng, M.H.; Ng,
S.F.; Mohd Amin, M.C.I. Development of a bacterial
cellulose-based hydrogel cell carrier containing
keratinocytes and fibroblasts for full-thickness wound
healing. Sci. Rep. 2018, 8, 1–12.
81. Wahid, F.; Hu, X.H.; Chu, L.Q.; Jia, S.R.; Xie, Y.Y.;
Zhong, C. Development of bacterial cellulose/chitosan-
basedsemi-interpenetrating hydrogels with
improvedmechanical and antibacterial properties. Int. J.
Biol. Macromol. 2019, 122, 380–38.
82. T. Volova, A. Shumilova, E. Nikolaeva, A. Kirichenko,
and E. Shishatskaya, “Biotechnological wound dressings
based on bacterial cellulose and degradable copolymer P
(3HB/ 4HB),” International Journal of biological
macromolecules, vol. 131, pp. 230–240, 2019.
83. N. Mohamad, M. C. I. Mohd Amin, M. Pandey, N.
Ahmad, and N. F. Rajab, “Bacterial cellulose/acrylic
acid hydrogel synthesized via electron beam irradiation:
accelerated burn wound healing in an animal model,”
Carbohydrate Polymers, vol. 114, pp. 312–320, 2014.
84. N. Mohamad, E. Y. X. Loh, M. B. Fauzi, M. H. Ng, and
M. C. I. Mohd Amin, “In vivo evaluation of bacterial
cellulose/ acrylic acid wound dressing hydrogel
containing keratinocytes and fibroblasts for burn
wounds,” Drug Delivery and Translational Research,
vol. 9, no. 2, pp. 444–452, 2019.
85. P. R. Moraes, S. Saska, H. Barud, et al.,“Bacterial
cellulose/collagen hydrogel for wound healing,”
Materials Research, vol. 19, pp. 106–116, 2016.
86. C. Zhou, Z. Yang, X. Xun, et al., “De novo strategy with
engineering a multifunctional bacterial cellulose-based
dressing for rapid healing of infected wounds,”
Bioactive Materials, 2021.
87. S. Tang, K. Chi, H. Xu, Q. Yong, J. Yang, and J. M.
Catchmark, “A covalently cross-linked hyaluronic acid/
bacterial cellulose composite hydrogel for potential
biological applications,” Carbohydrate Polymers, vol.
252, article 117123, 2021.
88. S. Khan, M. Ul-Islam, M. Ikram, et al., “Preparation and
structural characterization of surface-modified
microporous bacterial cellulose scaffolds: a potential
material for skin regeneration applications in vitro and in
1397 | P a g e
Nainika Srivastava et al., The Potential of Wound Healing By Microbial Cellulose

vivo,” International Journal of Biological and bio-engineered skin substitutes). Burns 1999;
Macromolecules, vol. 117, pp. 1200– 1210, 2018. 25:256–61.
89. J. Kingkaew, S. Kirdponpattara, N. Sanchavanakit, P. 104. Innes ME, Umraw N, FishJS, Gomez M, Cartotto RC.
Pavasant, and M. Phisalaphong, “Effect of molecular The use of silver-coated dressings on donor site wounds:
weight of chitosan on antimicrobial properties and tissue a prospective, controlled matched pair study. Burns
compatibility of chitosan-impregnated bacterial cellulose 2001; 27:621–7.
films,” Biotechnology and Bioprocess Engineering, vol. 105. Vloemans AFPM, Soesman AM, Kreis RW,
19, pp. 534–544, 2014. Middelkoop E. A newly developed hydro fiber dressing,
90. Y. Li, H. Jiang, W. Zheng, et al., “Bacterial cellulose– in the treatment of partial-thickness burns. Burns 2001;
hyaluronan nanocomposite biomaterials as wound 27:167–73.
dressings for severe skin injury repair,” Journal of 106. E. Y. X. Loh, N. Mohamad, M. B. Fauzi, M. H. Ng, S.
Materials Chemistry B, vol. 3, no. 17, pp. 3498–3507, F. Ng, and M. C. I. Mohd Amin, “Development of a
2015. bacterial cellulose-based hydrogel cell carrier containing
91. Z. Keskin, A. SendemirUrkmez, and E. E. Hames, keratinocytes and fibroblasts for full-thickness wound
“Novel keratin modified bacterial cellulose healing,” Scientific Reports, vol. 8, p. 2875, 2018.
nanocomposite production and characterization for skin 107. C. M. Souza, L. A. Mesquita, D. Souza, et al.,
tissue engineering,” Materials Science and Engineering: “Regeneration of skin tissue promoted by mesenchymal
C, vol. 75, pp. 1144–1153, 201. stem cells seeded in the nanostructured membrane,”
92. C. D. Radu, L. Verestiuc, E. Ulea, et al., “Evaluation of Transplantation Proceedings, vol. 46, pp. 1882–1886,
keratin/ bacterial cellulose-based scaffolds as potentially 2014.
burned wound dressing,” Applied Sciences, vol. 11, p. 108. M. de Alencar Silva, Y. K. de Carvalho Leite, C. E. de
1995, 2021. Carvalho, et al., “Behavior and biocompatibility of
93. S.-P. Lin, H.-N. Kung, Y.-S. Tsai, T.-N. Tseng, K.-D. rabbit bone marrow mesenchymal stem cells with
Hsu, and K.-C. Cheng, “Novel dextran modified bacterial cellulose membrane,” PeerJ, vol. 6, pp. e4656–
bacterial cellulose hydrogel accelerating cutaneous e4656, 2018.
wound healing,” Cellulose, vol. 24, pp. 4927–4937, 109. Y. M. Cao, M. Y. Liu, Z. W. Xue, et al., “Surface-
2017. structured bacterial cellulose loaded with hUSCs
94. H. Qiao, T. Guo, Y. Zheng, et al., “A novel microporous accelerate skin wound healing by promoting
oxidized bacterial cellulose/arginine composite and its angiogenesis in rats,” Biochemical and Biophysical
effect on the behavior of fibroblast/endothelial cell,” Research Communications, vol. 516, pp. 1167–1174,
Carbohydrate Polymers, vol. 184, pp. 323–332, 2018. 2019.
95. Z. Keskin, A. SendemirUrkmez, and E. E. Hames, 110. J. S. Boateng, K. H. Matthews, H. N. E. Stevens, and G.
“Novel keratin modified bacterial cellulose M. Eccleston, “Wound healing dressings and drug
nanocomposite production and characterization for skin delivery systems: a review,” Journal of Pharmaceutical
tissue engineering,” Materials Science and Engineering: Sciences, vol. 97, no. 8, pp. 2892–2923, 2008
C, vol. 75, pp. 1144–1153, 2017. 111. G. Gainza, S. Villullas, J. L. Pedraz, R. M. Hernandez,
96. C. D. Radu, L. Verestiuc, E. Ulea, et al., “Evaluation of and M. Igartua, “Advances in drug delivery systems
keratin/ bacterial cellulose-based scaffolds as potentially (DDSs) to release growth factors for wound healing and
burned wound dressing,” Applied Sciences, vol. 11, p. skin regeneration,” Biology and Medicine, vol. 11, no. 6,
1995, 2021. pp. 1551–1573, 2015.
97. F. Farideh, M. Mohsen, and T. Azade, “Arginine 112. https://www.mdpi.com/2073-4360/13/10/1546/htm
Functionalized Bacterial Cellulose Nanofibers 113. Y.-K. Lin, K.-H. Chen, K.-L. Ou, and M. Liu, “Effects
Containing Gel as an Effective Wound Dressing: In vitro of different extracellular matrices and growth factor
and In vivo Evaluation,” Current Drug Delivery, vol. 15, immobilization on biodegradability and biocompatibility
no. 6, pp. 840–849, 2018. of macroporous bacterial cellulose,” Journal of Bioactive
98. Martin P. Wound healing-aiming for perfect skin and Compatible Polymers, vol. 26, pp. 508–518, 2011.
regeneration. Science 1997; 276:75–81. 114. P. Rørth, “Whence directionality: guidance mechanisms
99. Balasubramani M, Kumar TR, Babu M. Skin substitutes in solitary and collective cell migration,” Developmental
a review. Burns 2001; 27:534–44. Cell, vol. 20, pp. 9–18, 2011.
100. Czaja, Wojciech, et al. "Microbial cellulose-the natural 115. M. Jin, W. Chen, Z. Li, Y. Zhang, M. Zhang, and S.
power to heal wounds." Biomaterials 27.2 (2006): 145- Chen, “Patterned bacterial cellulose wound dressing for
151. hypertrophic scar inhibition behavior,” Cellulose, vol.
101. Jones I, Currie L, Martin R. A guide to biological skin 25, pp. 6705– 6717, 2018.
substitutes. Br J Plastic Surg 2002; 55:185–93. 116. Y. Hu, H. Liu, X. Zhou, et al., “Surface engineering of
102. Walker M, Hobot JA, Newman GR, Bowler PG. spongy bacterial cellulose via constructing crossed
Scanning electron microscopic examination of bacterial groove/column micropattern by low-energy CO2 laser
immobilization in carboxymethyl cellulose photolithography toward scar-free wound healing,”
(AQUACELs) and alginate dressings. Biomaterials Materials Science and Engineering: C, vol. 99, pp. 333–
2003; 24:883–90. 343, 2019.
103. Demling RH, DeSanti L. Management of partial- 117. N. Mohamad, F. Buang, A. Mat Lazim, N. Ahmad, C.
thickness facial burns (comparison of topical antibiotics Martin, and M. C. I. Mohd Amin, “Characterization and
biocompatibility evaluation of bacterial cellulose-based
1398 | P a g e
 International Journal of Recent Scientific Research Vol. 13, Issue, 06 (A), pp. 1388-1400, June, 2022
wound dressing hydrogel: effect of electron beam
irradiation doses and concentration of acrylic acid,”
Journal of biomedical materials research. Part B,
Applied biomaterials, vol. 105, no. 8, pp. 2553–2564,
2017.
118. M. Pandey, N. Mohamad, W.-L. Low, C. Martin, and M.
C. I. M. Amin, “Microwaved bacterial cellulose-based
hydrogel microparticles for the healing of partial-
thickness burn wounds,” Drug delivery and translational
research, vol. 7, pp. 89–99, 2017.
119. L. P. Soares, M. G. D. Oliveira, A. L. B. Pinheiro, B. R.
Fronza, and M. E. S. Maciel, “Effects of laser therapy on
experimental wound healing using oxidized regenerated
cellulose hemostat,” Photomedicine and laser surgery,
vol. 26, no. 1, pp. 10–13, 2008.
120. S. Chen and Y. Huang, “Bacterial cellulose nanofibers
decorated with phthalocyanine: Preparation,
characterization and dye removal performance,”
Materials Letters, vol. 142,pp. 235–237, 2015.
121. M. Safaei, M. Taran, M. M. Imani, et al., “Application
of Taguchi method in the optimization of synthesis of
cellulose-MgO bionanocomposite as an antibacterial
agent,” Polish Journal of Chemical Technology, vol. 21,
2019.
122. S. Moritz, C. Wiegand, F. Wesarg, et al., “Active wound
dressings based on bacterial nanocellulose as drug
delivery system for octenidine,” International Journal of
Pharmaceutics, vol. 471, no. 1-2, pp. 45–55, 2014.
123. W. Czaja, A. Krystynowicz, S. Bielecki, and R. M.
Brown, “Microbial cellulose—the natural power to heal
wounds,” Biomaterials, vol. 27, pp. 145–151, 2006.
124. M. Safaei, M. Taran, R. Rezaei, et al., “Synthesis and
anticancer properties of bacterial cellulose-magnesium
oxide bionanocomposite,” Current Issues in Pharmacy
and Medical Sciences, vol. 32, pp. 29–33, 2019.
125. A. Gupta, D. Keddie, V. Kannappan, et al., “Production
and characterization of bacterial cellulose hydrogels
loaded with curcumin encapsulated in cyclodextrins as
wound dressings,” European Polymer Journal, vol. 118,
pp. 437–450, 2019.
126. I. B. de Mattos, S. P. Nischwitz, A.-C. Tuca et al.,
“Delivery of antiseptic solutions by a bacterial cellulose
wound dressing: uptake, release and antibacterial
efficacy of octenidine and povidone-iodine,” Burns, vol.
46, no. 4, pp. 918–927, 2020.
127. N. Shah, M. Ul-Islam, W. A. Khattak, and J. K. Park,
“Overview of bacterial cellulose composites: a
multipurpose advanced material,” Carbohydrate
Polymers, vol. 98, pp. 1585–1598, 2013.
128. C. Campano, A. Balea, A. Blanco, and C. Negro,
“Enhancement of the fermentation process and
properties of bacterial cellulose: a review,” Cellulose,
vol. 23, no. 1, pp. 57–91, 2016.
129. F. Esa, S. M. Tasirin, and N. A. Rahman, “Overview of
bacterial cellulose production and application,”
Agriculture and Agricultural Science Procedia, vol. 2,
pp. 113–119, 2014.
130. M. Ul-Islam, W. A. Khattak, M. W. Ullah, S. Khan, and
J. K. Park, “Synthesis of regenerated bacterial cellulose-
zinc oxide nanocomposite films for biomedical
applications,” Cellulose, vol. 21, no. 1, pp
131. A. Khalid, R. Khan, M. Ul-Islam, T. Khan, and F.
Wahid, “Bacterial cellulose-zinc oxide nanocomposites
as a novel dressing system for burn wounds,”
Carbohydrate Polymers, vol. 164, pp. 214–221, 2017.
132. Z. Luo, J. Liu, H. Lin, et al., “In situ fabrication of nano
ZnO/BCM biocomposite based on MA modified
bacterial cellulose membrane for antibacterial and
wound healing,” International journal of nanomedicine,
vol. 15, pp. 1–15, 2020.
133. S. Ye, L. Jiang, J. Wu et al., “Flexible amoxicillin-
grafted bacterial cellulose sponges for wound dressing:
in vitro and in vivo evaluation,” ACS Applied Materials
& Interfaces, vol. 10, no. 6, pp. 5862–5870, 2018.
134. C. Wiegand, S. Moritz, N. Hessler, et al., “Antimicrobial
functionalization of bacterial nanocellulose by loading
with polihexanide and povidone-iodine,” Journal of
Materials Science: Materials in Medicine, vol. 26, p.
245, 2015.
135. Y. Wang, C. Wang, Y. Xie, et al., “Highly transparent,
highly flexible composite membrane with multiple
antimicrobial effects used for promoting wound
healing,” Carbohydrate Polymers, vol. 222, article
114985, 2019.
136. S. Jiji, S. Udhayakumar, C. Rose, C. Muralidharan, and
K. Kadirvelu, “Thymol enriched bacterial cellulose
hydrogel as an effective material for third-degree burn
wound repair,” International Journal of Biological
Macromolecules, vol. 122, pp. 452–460, 2019.
137. A. Futagami, M. Ishizaki, Y. Fukuda, S. Kawana, and N.
Yamanaka, “Wound healing involves induction of
cyclooxygenase-2 expression in rat skin,” Laboratory
Investigation, vol. 82, pp. 1503–1513, 2002.
138. P. Brassolatti, H. W. Kido, P. S. Bossini, et al.,
“Bacterial cellulose membrane used as biological
dressings on third-degree burns in rats,” Bio-medical
materials and engineering, vol. 29, no. 1, pp. 29–42,
2018.
139. N. Melnikova, A. Knyazev, V. Nikolskiy, et al.,
“Wound healing composite materials of bacterial
cellulose and zinc oxide nanoparticles with immobilized
betulin diphosphate,” Nanomaterials, vol. 11, p. 713,
2021.
140. S. Napavichayanun, S. Ampawong, T. Harnsilpong, A.
Angspatt, and P. Aramwit, “Inflammatory reaction,
clinical efficacy, and safety of bacterial cellulose wound
dressing containing silk sericin and polyhexamethylene
biguanide for wound treatment,” Archives of
Dermatological Research, vol. 310, pp. 795–805, 2018.
141. B. Kumar, M. Vijayakumar, R. Govindarajan, and P.
Pushpangadan, “Ethnopharmacological approaches to
wound healing-Exploring medicinal plants of India,”
Journal of Ethnopharmacology, vol. 114, pp. 103–113,
2007.
142. A. Picolotto, D. Pergher, G. P. Pereira, et al., “Bacterial
cellulose membrane associated with red propolis as
phytomodulator: improved healing effects in
experimental models of diabetes mellitus,” Biomedicine
& Pharmacotherapy, vol. 112, article 108640, 2019.
143. W. Sajjad, F. He, M. W. Ullah, et al., “Fabrication of
bacterial cellulose-curcumin nanocomposite as a novel
1399 | P a g e
Nainika Srivastava et al., The Potential of Wound Healing By Microbial Cellulose
dressing for partial thickness skin burn,” Frontiers in
bioengineering and biotechnology, vol. 8, 2020.
144. K. M. Pasaribu, S. Gea, S. Ilyas, et al., “Fabrication and
in-vivo study of micro-colloidal Zanthoxylum
acanthopodium loaded bacterial cellulose as a burn
wound dressing,” Polymers,vol. 12, p. 1436, 2020.
145. Y. Qiu, L. Qiu, J. Cui, and Q. Wei, “Bacterial cellulose
and bacterial cellulose-vaccarin membranes for wound
healing,” Materials Science and Engineering: C, vol. 59,
pp. 303–309, 2016.
146. N. Li, L. Yang, C. Pan, et al., “Naturally-occurring
bacterial cellulose-hyperbranched cationic
polysaccharide derivative/MMP-9 siRNA composite
dressing for wound healing International Journal of
Polymer Science 23 enhancement in diabetic rats,” Acta
Biomaterialia, vol. 102, pp. 298–314, 2020.
147. T. Volova, A. Shumilova, E. Nikolaeva, A. Kirichenko,
and E. Shishatskaya, “Biotechnological wound dressings
based on bacterial cellulose and degradable copolymer P
(3HB/4HB),” International Journal of biological
macromolecules, vol. 131, pp. 230–240, 2019.
148. L. Mao, S. Hu, Y. Gao, et al., “Biodegradable and
electroactive regenerated bacterial cellulose/MXene
(Ti3C2Tx) composite hydrogel as wound dressing for
accelerating skin wound healing under Electrical
stimulation,” Advanced Healthcare Materials, vol. 9,
article 2000872, 2020.
149. S. Napavichayanun, R. Yamdech, and P. Aramwit, “The
safety and efficacy of bacterial nanocellulose wound
dressing incorporating sericin and polyhexamethylene
biguanide: in vitro, in vivo and clinical studies,”
Archives of Dermatological Research, vol. 308, pp. 123–
132, 2016.
150. X. Wen, Y. Zheng, J. Wu et al., “In vitro and in vivo
investigation of bacterial cellulose dressing containing
uniform silver sulfadiazine nanoparticles for burn wound
healing,” Progress in Natural Science: Materials
International, vol. 25, pp. 197–203, 2015.
151. J. Wu, Y. Zheng, X. Wen, Q. Lin, X. Chen, and Z. Wu,
“Silver nanoparticle/bacterial cellulose gel membranes
for antibacterial wound dressing: investigation in vitro
and in vivo,” Biomedical Materials, vol. 9, article
035005, 2014.
152. A. Khalid, R. Khan, M. Ul-Islam, T. Khan, and F.
Wahid, “Bacterial cellulose-zinc oxide nanocomposites
as a novel dressing system for burn wounds,”
Carbohydrate Polymers, vol. 164, pp. 214–221, 2017.
How to cite this article:
Nainika Srivastava et al.2022, The Potential of Wound Healing By Microbial Cellulose. Int J Recent Sci Res. 13(06), pp. 1388-
1400. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.24327/ijrsr.2022.1306.0295
*******
153. A. Khalid, H. Ullah, M. Ul-Islam, et al., “Bacterial
cellulose–TiO2 nanocomposites promote healing and
tissue regeneration in burn mice model,” RSC Advances,
vol. 7, pp. 47662–47668, 2017.
154. W. Sajjad, T. Khan, M. Ul-Islam, et al., “Development
of modified montmorillonite-bacterial cellulose
nanocomposites as a novel substitute for burn skin and
tissue regeneration,” Carbohydrate Polymers, vol. 206,
pp. 548–556, 2019.
155. Y. Wang, C. Wang, Y. Xie, et al., “Highly transparent,
highly flexible composite membrane with multiple
antimicrobial effects used for promoting wound
healing,” Carbohydrate Polymers, vol. 222, article
114985, 2019.
156. W.-C. Lin, C.-C. Lien, H.-J. Yeh, C.-M. Yu, and S. H.
Hsu, “Bacterial cellulose and bacterial cellulose–
chitosan membranes for wound dressing applications,”
Carbohydrate Polymers, vol. 94, no. 1, pp. 603–611,
2013.
157. Y. Li, Y. Tian, W. Zheng, et al., “Composites of
bacterial cellulose and small molecule-decorated gold
nanoparticles for treating Gram-negative bacteria-
infected wounds,” Small, vol. 13, article 1700130, 2017.
158. R. Portela, C. R. Leal, P. L. Almeida, and R. G. Sobral,
“Bacterial cellulose: a versatile biopolymer for wound
dressing applications,” Microbial Biotechnology, vol.
12, no. 4, pp. 586–610, 2019.
159. T. Wild, M. Bruckner, M. Payrich, C. Schwarz, T.
Eberlein, and A. Andriessen, “Eradication of methicillin-
resistant Staphylococcus aureus in pressure ulcers
comparing a polyhexanide-containing cellulose dressing
with polyhexanide swabs in a prospective randomized
study,” Advances in skin & wound care, vol. 25, pp. 17–
22, 2012.
160. G. F. Picheth, C. L. Pirich, M. R. Sierakowski, et al.,
“Bacterial cellulose in biomedical applications: a
review,” International Journal of biological
macromolecules, vol. 104, pp. 97–106,2017.
161. W. K. Czaja, D. J. Young, M. Kawecki, and R. M.
Brown, “The prospects of microbial cellulose in
biomedical applications,” Biomacromolecules, vol. 8,
pp. 1–12, 2007.
162. A. Aboelnaga, M. Elmasry, O. A. Adly, et al.,
“Microbial cellulose dressing compared with silver
sulphadiazine for the treatment of partial-thickness
burns: a prospective, randomized, clinical trial,” Burns,
vol. 44, pp. 1982–1988, 2018.
1400 | P a g e