Direct metagenomics investigation of non-surgical hard-to-heal wounds: a review.
16S rDNA metagenomics
Non-surgical hard-to-heal wounds
Pathogen genome detection
Shotgun metagenomics, microbial diversity
Wound healing
Wound-colonising microorganisms
Journal
Annals of clinical microbiology and antimicrobials
ISSN: 1476-0711
Titre abrégé: Ann Clin Microbiol Antimicrob
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101152152
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
03 May 2024
03 May 2024
Historique:
received:
13
10
2023
accepted:
22
04
2024
medline:
4
5
2024
pubmed:
4
5
2024
entrez:
3
5
2024
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Non-surgical chronic wounds, including diabetes-related foot diseases (DRFD), pressure injuries (PIs) and venous leg ulcers (VLU), are common hard-to-heal wounds. Wound evolution partly depends on microbial colonisation or infection, which is often confused by clinicians, thereby hampering proper management. Current routine microbiology investigation of these wounds is based on in vitro culture, focusing only on a limited panel of the most frequently isolated bacteria, leaving a large part of the wound microbiome undocumented. A literature search was conducted on original studies published through October 2022 reporting metagenomic next generation sequencing (mNGS) of chronic wound samples. Studies were eligible for inclusion if they applied 16 S rRNA metagenomics or shotgun metagenomics for microbiome analysis or diagnosis. Case reports, prospective, or retrospective studies were included. However, review articles, animal studies, in vitro model optimisation, benchmarking, treatment optimisation studies, and non-clinical studies were excluded. Articles were identified in PubMed, Google Scholar, Web of Science, Microsoft Academic, Crossref and Semantic Scholar databases. Of the 3,202 articles found in the initial search, 2,336 articles were removed after deduplication and 834 articles following title and abstract screening. A further 14 were removed after full text reading, with 18 articles finally included. Data were provided for 3,628 patients, including 1,535 DRFDs, 956 VLUs, and 791 PIs, with 164 microbial genera and 116 species identified using mNGS approaches. A high microbial diversity was observed depending on the geographical location and wound evolution. Clinically infected wounds were the most diverse, possibly due to a widespread colonisation by pathogenic bacteria from body and environmental microbiota. mNGS data identified the presence of virus (EBV) and fungi (Candida and Aspergillus species), as well as Staphylococcus and Pseudomonas bacteriophages. This study highlighted the benefit of mNGS for time-effective pathogen genome detection. Despite the majority of the included studies investigating only 16 S rDNA, ignoring a part of viral, fungal and parasite colonisation, mNGS detected a large number of bacteria through the included studies. Such technology could be implemented in routine microbiology for hard-to-heal wound microbiota investigation and post-treatment wound colonisation surveillance.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Non-surgical chronic wounds, including diabetes-related foot diseases (DRFD), pressure injuries (PIs) and venous leg ulcers (VLU), are common hard-to-heal wounds. Wound evolution partly depends on microbial colonisation or infection, which is often confused by clinicians, thereby hampering proper management. Current routine microbiology investigation of these wounds is based on in vitro culture, focusing only on a limited panel of the most frequently isolated bacteria, leaving a large part of the wound microbiome undocumented.
METHODS
METHODS
A literature search was conducted on original studies published through October 2022 reporting metagenomic next generation sequencing (mNGS) of chronic wound samples. Studies were eligible for inclusion if they applied 16 S rRNA metagenomics or shotgun metagenomics for microbiome analysis or diagnosis. Case reports, prospective, or retrospective studies were included. However, review articles, animal studies, in vitro model optimisation, benchmarking, treatment optimisation studies, and non-clinical studies were excluded. Articles were identified in PubMed, Google Scholar, Web of Science, Microsoft Academic, Crossref and Semantic Scholar databases.
RESULTS
RESULTS
Of the 3,202 articles found in the initial search, 2,336 articles were removed after deduplication and 834 articles following title and abstract screening. A further 14 were removed after full text reading, with 18 articles finally included. Data were provided for 3,628 patients, including 1,535 DRFDs, 956 VLUs, and 791 PIs, with 164 microbial genera and 116 species identified using mNGS approaches. A high microbial diversity was observed depending on the geographical location and wound evolution. Clinically infected wounds were the most diverse, possibly due to a widespread colonisation by pathogenic bacteria from body and environmental microbiota. mNGS data identified the presence of virus (EBV) and fungi (Candida and Aspergillus species), as well as Staphylococcus and Pseudomonas bacteriophages.
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
This study highlighted the benefit of mNGS for time-effective pathogen genome detection. Despite the majority of the included studies investigating only 16 S rDNA, ignoring a part of viral, fungal and parasite colonisation, mNGS detected a large number of bacteria through the included studies. Such technology could be implemented in routine microbiology for hard-to-heal wound microbiota investigation and post-treatment wound colonisation surveillance.
Identifiants
pubmed: 38702796
doi: 10.1186/s12941-024-00698-z
pii: 10.1186/s12941-024-00698-z
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Review
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
39Informations de copyright
© 2024. The Author(s).
Références
Tomic-Canic M, Burgess JL, O’Neill KE, Strbo N, Pastar I. Skin Microbiota and its Interplay with Wound Healing. Am J Clin Dermatol [Internet]. 2020;21:36–43. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40257-020-00536-w .
Lindholm C, Searle R. Wound management for the 21st century: combining effectiveness and efficiency. Int Wound J. 2016;13:5–15.
doi: 10.1111/iwj.12623
pubmed: 27460943
pmcid: 7949725
Zhao R, Liang H, Clarke E, Jackson C, Xue M. Inflammation in chronic wounds. Int J Mol Sci. 2016;17:1–14.
doi: 10.3390/ijms17122085
Kirsner RS. The wound healing society chronic wound ulcer healing guidelines update of the 2006 guidelines - blending old with new. Wound Repair Regen. 2016;24:110–1.
doi: 10.1111/wrr.12393
pubmed: 26663573
Kirsner RS, Vivas AC. Lower-extremity ulcers: diagnosis and management. Br J Dermatol. 2015;173:379–90. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjd.13953 .
Edmonds M, Manu C, Vas P. The current burden of diabetic foot disease. J Clin Orthop Trauma. 2021;17:88–93. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcot.2021.01.017 .
Jia L, Parker CN, Parker TJ, Kinnear EM, Derhy PH, Alvarado AM, et al. Incidence and risk factors for developing infection in patients presenting with uninfected diabetic foot ulcers. PLoS ONE. 2017;12:1–15.
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0177916
Lipsky BA, Senneville É, Abbas ZG, Aragón-Sánchez J, Diggle M, Embil JM, et al. Guidelines on the diagnosis and treatment of foot infection in persons with diabetes (IWGDF 2019 update). Diabetes Metab Res Rev. 2020;36:e3280.
Edsberg LE, Black JM, Goldberg M, McNichol L, Moore L, Sieggreen M. Revised National Pressure Ulcer Advisory Panel Pressure Injury Staging System. J Wound, Ostomy Cont Nurs. 2016;43:585–97.
Gomes F, Furtado GE, Henriques M, Sousa LB, Santos-Costa P, Bernardes R, et al. The skin microbiome of infected pressure ulcers: a review and implications for health professionals. Eur J Clin Invest. 2022;52:1–17.
doi: 10.1111/eci.13688
Papp AA. Incisional negative pressure therapy reduces complications and costs in pressure ulcer reconstruction. Int Wound J. 2019;16:394–400.
doi: 10.1111/iwj.13045
pubmed: 30548531
Probst S, Weller CD, Bobbink P, Saini C, Pugliese M, Skinner MB, et al. Prevalence and incidence of venous leg ulcers—a protocol for a systematic review. Syst Rev. 2021;10:1–4.
doi: 10.1186/s13643-021-01697-3
Li S, Renick P, Senkowsky J, Nair A, Tang L. Diagnostics for Wound infections. Adv Wound Care. 2021;10:317–27.
doi: 10.1089/wound.2019.1103
Rahim K, Saleha S, Zhu X, Huo L, Basit A, Franco OL. Bacterial contribution in chronicity of wounds. Microb Ecol. 2017;73:710–21. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00248-016-0867-9 .
Avila-Herrera A, Thissen JB, Mulakken N, Schobel SA, Morrison MD, Zhou X, et al. Metagenomic features of bioburden serve as outcome indicators in combat extremity wounds. Sci Rep. 2022;12:1–17. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-16170-x .
Wolcott RD, Hanson JD, Rees EJ, Koenig LD, Phillips CD, Wolcott RA, et al. Analysis of the chronic wound microbiota of 2,963 patients by 16S rDNA pyrosequencing. Wound Repair Regen. 2016;24:163–74.
doi: 10.1111/wrr.12370
pubmed: 26463872
Dunyach-Remy C, Salipante F, Lavigne JP, Brunaud M, Demattei C, Yahiaoui-Martinez A et al. Pressure ulcers microbiota dynamics and wound evolution. Sci Rep. 2021;11.
Sergent AP, Slekovec C, Pauchot J, Jeunet L, Bertrand X, Hocquet D, et al. Bacterial contamination of the hospital environment during wound dressing change. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res. 2012;98:441–5. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.otsr.2012.02.005 .
Giamarellou H, Antoniadou A, Kanellakopoulou K. Acinetobacter baumannii: a universal threat to public health? Int J Antimicrob Agents. 2008;32:106–19.
doi: 10.1016/j.ijantimicag.2008.02.013
pubmed: 18571905
Çitil MU, Mete E, Oğuz EO, Abban Mete G, Şahin B, Kaleli İ. Investigation of the effect of ibuprofen on wound healing in experimental Staphylococcus aureus soft tissue infections. Mikrobiyol Bul. 2015;49:166–80.
doi: 10.5578/mb.9234
pubmed: 26167817
Kramer A, Dissemond J, Kim S, Willy C, Mayer D, Papke R, et al. Consensus on Wound Antisepsis: Update 2018. Skin Pharmacol Physiol. 2018;31:28–58.
doi: 10.1159/000481545
pubmed: 29262416
Stańkowska M, Garbacz K, Korzon-Burakowska A, Bronk M, Skotarczak M, Szymańska-Dubowik A. Microbiological, clinical and radiological aspects of diabetic foot ulcers infected with methicillin-resistant and-sensitive Staphylococcus aureus. Pathogens. 2022;11:701.
Heravi FS, Zakrzewski M, Vickery K, Armstrong DG, Hu H. Bacterial diversity of diabetic foot ulcers: current status and future prospectives. J Clin Med. 2019;8:1935.
Hoyo J, Bassegoda A, Ferreres G, Hinojosa-Caballero D, Gutiérrez-Capitán M, Baldi A, et al. Rapid colorimetric detection of wound infection with a fluidic paper device. Int J Mol Sci. 2022;23:9129.
Diban F, Di Lodovico S, Di Fermo P, D’Ercole S, D’Arcangelo S, Di Giulio M, et al. Biofilms in chronic wound infections: innovative antimicrobial approaches using the in vitro lubbock chronic wound biofilm model. Int J Mol Sci. 2023;24:1004.
Esin S, Kaya E, Maisetta G, Romanelli M, Batoni G. The antibacterial and antibiofilm activity of Granudacyn in vitro in a 3D collagen wound infection model. J Wound Care. 2022;31:908–22. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36367808/ .
Wolcott RD, Gontcharova V, Sun Y, Dowd SE. Evaluation of the bacterial diversity among and within individual venous leg ulcers using bacterial tag-encoded FLX and Titanium amplicon pyrosequencing and metagenomic approaches. BMC Microbiol. 2009;9:1–11.
doi: 10.1186/1471-2180-9-226
Guidelines. (2023 update) - IWGDF Guidelines [Internet]. [cited 2023 Jul 20]. https://iwgdfguidelines.org/guidelines-2023/ .
Rethlefsen ML, Kirtley S, Waffenschmidt S, Ayala AP, Moher D, Page MJ, et al. PRISMA-S: an extension to the PRISMA statement for reporting literature searches in systematic reviews. Syst Rev. 2021;10:39. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33499930/ .
Johani K, Fritz BG, Bjarnsholt T, Lipsky BA, Jensen SO, Yang M, et al. Understanding the microbiome of diabetic foot osteomyelitis: insights from molecular and microscopic approaches. Clin Microbiol Infect. 2019;25:332–9. http://www.clinicalmicrobiologyandinfection.com/article/S1198743X1830421X/fulltext .
Park JU, Oh B, Lee JP, Choi MH, Lee MJ, Kim BS. Influence of microbiota on diabetic foot wound in comparison with adjacent normal skin based on the clinical features. Biomed Res Int. 2020;2019:7459236.
Zou M, Cai Y, Hu P, Cao Y, Luo X, Fan X, et al. Analysis of the composition and functions of the microbiome in diabetic foot osteomyelitis based on 16s rRNA and metagenome sequencing technology. Diabetes. 2020;69:2423–39.
doi: 10.2337/db20-0503
pubmed: 32801139
Moon J, Kim N, Lee HS, Lee ST, Jung KH, Park KI, et al. Nanopore 16S amplicon sequencing enhances the understanding of pathogens in medically intractable diabetic foot infections. Diabetes. 2021;70:1357–71.
doi: 10.2337/db20-0907
pubmed: 34162681
Jnana A, Muthuraman V, Varghese VH, Chakrabarty S, Murali TS, Ramachandra L, et al. Microbial community distribution and core microbiome in successive wound grades of individuals with diabetic foot ulcers. Appl Environ Microbiol. 2020;86:e02608-19. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31924616/ .
Suryaletha K, John J, Radhakrishnan MP, George S, Thomas S. Metataxonomic approach to decipher the polymicrobial burden in diabetic foot ulcer and its biofilm mode of infection. Int Wound J. 2018;15:473–81.
doi: 10.1111/iwj.12888
pubmed: 29356343
pmcid: 7949765
Chen Y, Shi Y, Zhu W, You J, Yang J, Xie Y, et al. Combining CRISPR-Cas12a-based technology and metagenomics next generation sequencing: a new paradigm for rapid and full-scale detection of microbes in infectious diabetic foot samples. Front Microbiol. 2021;12:742040.
Saeb ATM, Tayeb HT, Ouizi S, Nassar MS, Alfadda A, Raja GKU, et al. Comparative investigation of the diabetic foot ulcer microbiome. bioRxiv [Internet]. 2021.01.21.427721. https://www.biorxiv.org/content/early/2021/01/22/2021.01.21.427721 .
Mudrik-Zohar H, Carasso S, Gefen T, Zalmanovich A, Katzir M, Cohen Y, et al. Microbiome characterization of infected diabetic foot ulcers in association with clinical outcomes: traditional cultures versus molecular sequencing methods. Front Cell Infect Microbiol. 2022;12:836699.
doi: 10.3389/fcimb.2022.836699
Yang WT, Chiang I, Tseng CH, Cheng C, Lin JH, Liu PY, et al. Metagenomic sequencing and histology on a chronic wound identified Epstein-Barr virus-associated lymphoma. Evol Bioinform Online. 2022;18:11769343221110663.
doi: 10.1177/11769343221110663
Choi Y, Oda E, Waldman O, Sajda T, Beck C, Oh I. Next-generation sequencing for pathogen identification in infected foot ulcers. Foot Ankle Orthop. 2021;6:1–8.
doi: 10.1177/24730114211026933
Kalan LR, Meisel JS, Loesche MA, Horwinski J, Soaita I, Chen X, et al. Efficacy Cell Host Microbe. 2019;25:641–55.
doi: 10.1016/j.chom.2019.03.006
pubmed: 31006638
Radzieta M, Sadeghpour-Heravi F, Peters TJ, Hu H, Vickery K, Jeffries T, et al. A multiomics approach to identify host-microbe alterations associated with infection severity in diabetic foot infections: a pilot study. NPJ Biofilms Microbiomes [Internet]. 2021;7:29. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41522-021-00202-x .
Gardiner M, Vicaretti M, Sparks J, Bansal S, Bush S, Liu M, et al. A longitudinal study of the diabetic skin and wound microbiome. PeerJ. 2017;2017:3543.
doi: 10.7717/peerj.3543
Malone M, Johani K, Jensen SO, Gosbell IB, Dickson HG, Hu H, et al. Next generation DNA sequencing of tissues from infected Diabetic Foot Ulcers. EBioMedicine. 2017;21:142–9.
doi: 10.1016/j.ebiom.2017.06.026
pubmed: 28669650
pmcid: 5514496
Dunyach-Remy C, Salipante F, Lavigne JP, Brunaud M, Demattei C, Yahiaoui-Martinez A, et al. Pressure ulcers microbiota dynamics and wound evolution. Sci Rep. 2020;11:18506.
Ladhani HA, Yowler CJ, Claridge JA. Burn wound colonization, infection, and sepsis. 2021;22:44–8. https://doi.org/10.1089/sur.2020.346 .
Bowler PG. Wound pathophysiology, infection and therapeutic options. Ann Med. 2002;34:419–27. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/078538902321012360 .
Microbial communities within the chronic. wound | Microbiology Society [Internet]. [cited 2023 Feb 6]. https://microbiologysociety.org/publication/past-issues/the-microbiome/article/microbial-communities-within-the-chronic-wound.html .
Tomic-Canic M, Burgess JL, O’Neill KE, Strbo N, Pastar I. Skin microbiota and its interplay with Wound Healing. Am J Clin Dermatol. 2020;21:36–43.
doi: 10.1007/s40257-020-00536-w
pubmed: 32914215
pmcid: 7584558
Tang Q, Xue N, Ding X, Tsai KHY, Hew JJ, Jiang R, et al. Role of wound microbiome, strategies of microbiota delivery system and clinical management. Adv Drug Deliv Rev. 2023;192:114671.
doi: 10.1016/j.addr.2022.114671
pubmed: 36538989
Pohl HG, Groah SL, Pérez-Losada M, Ljungberg I, Sprague BM, Chandal N, et al. The urine microbiome of healthy men and women differs by urine collection method. Int Neurourol J. 2020;24:41–51.
doi: 10.5213/inj.1938244.122
pubmed: 32252185
pmcid: 7136448
Ogai K, Nana BC, Lloyd YM, Arios JP, Jiyarom B, Awanakam H, et al. Skin microbiome profile of healthy Cameroonians and Japanese. Sci Rep. 2022;12:1364. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-05244-5 .
Dréno B, Araviiskaia E, Berardesca E, Gontijo G, Sanchez Viera M, Xiang LF, et al. Microbiome in healthy skin, update for dermatologists. J Eur Acad Dermatology Venereol. 2016;30:2038–47.
doi: 10.1111/jdv.13965
Zeng Q, Li D, He Y, Li Y, Yang Z, Zhao X, et al. Discrepant gut microbiota markers for the classification of obesity-related metabolic abnormalities. Sci Rep. 2019;9:13424. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-019-49462-w .
Elizabeth A, Grice, Julia A. Segre. The skin microbiome. Nat Rev Microbiol. 2011;588:S209.
Shahi SK, Zarei K, Guseva NV, Mangalam AK. Microbiota analysis using two-step PCR and next-generation 16S rRNA gene sequencing. J Vis Exp. 2019;152:10.3791/59980.
Ge Y, Wang Q. Current research on fungi in chronic wounds. Front Mol Biosci. 2023;9:1057766.
Chin K-Y. Editorial: new strategies for the diagnosis and treatment of multi-drug resistant bacteria or fungi in wounds. Front Mol Biosci. 2023;10:1248534.
Verbanic S, Deacon JM, Chen IA. The chronic wound phageome: phage diversity and associations with wounds and healing outcomes. Microbiol Spectr. 2022;10:e0277721.
doi: 10.1128/spectrum.02777-21
Verbanic S, Shen Y, Lee J, Deacon JM, Chen IA. Microbial predictors of healing and short-term effect of debridement on the microbiome of chronic wounds. NPJ Biofilms Microbiomes. 2020;6:21. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41522-020-0130-5 .
Sen CK. Human wound and its Burden: updated 2020 Compendium of estimates. Adv Wound Care. 2021;10:281–92.
doi: 10.1089/wound.2021.0026
Yu Y, Dunaway S, Champer J, Kim J, Alikhan A. Changing our microbiome: probiotics in dermatology. Br J Dermatol. 2020;182:39–46.
doi: 10.1111/bjd.18659
pubmed: 31049923
Johnson TR, Gómez BI, McIntyre MK, Dubick MA, Christy RJ, Nicholson SE, et al. The cutaneous microbiome and wounds: new molecular targets to promote wound healing. Int J Mol Sci. 2018;19:2699.
Bjarnsholt T. The role of bacterial biofilms in chronic infections. APMIS Suppl. 2013;1–51.
Imirzalioglu C, Sethi S, Schneider C, Hain T, Chakraborty T, Mayser P, et al. Distinct polymicrobial populations in a chronic foot ulcer with implications for diagnostics and anti-infective therapy. BMC Res Notes. 2014;7:196.
Grice EA, Segre JA. Interaction of the microbiome with the innate immune response in chronic wounds. Adv Exp Med Biol. 2012;946:55–68.
doi: 10.1007/978-1-4614-0106-3_4
pubmed: 21948362
pmcid: 3516280
Yatsunenko T, Rey FE, Manary MJ, Trehan I, Dominguez-Bello MG, Contreras M, et al. Human gut microbiome viewed across age and geography. Nature. 2012;486:222–7. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/22699611/ .
Pasolli E, Asnicar F, Manara S, Zolfo M, Karcher N, Armanini F, et al. Extensive unexplored human microbiome diversity revealed by over 150,000 genomes from metagenomes spanning age, geography, and lifestyle. Cell. 2019;176:649.
Frank DN, Wysocki A, Specht-Glick DD, Rooney A, Feldman RA, St Amand AL, et al. Microbial diversity in chronic open wounds. Wound Repair Regen. 2009;17:163–72. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1524-475X.2009.00472.x .
Pang M, Yao Z, Chen C, Lei X, Cheng B. Human-microorganism mutualism theory: possible mechanisms for the delayed chronic wound healing process. Med Hypotheses. 2020;141:109720.
doi: 10.1016/j.mehy.2020.109720
pubmed: 32298919
Black CE, Costerton JW. Current concepts regarding the Effect of Wound Microbial Ecology and Biofilms on Wound Healing. Surg Clin North Am. 2010;90:1147–60.
doi: 10.1016/j.suc.2010.08.009
pubmed: 21074033
Wall IB, Davies CE, Hill KE, Wilson MJ, Stephens P, Harding KG, et al. Potential role of anaerobic cocci in impaired human wound healing. Wound Repair Regen. 2002;10:346–53. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/ https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1524-475X.2002.t01-1-10602.x .
Dekker D, Pankok F, Thye T, Taudien S, Oppong K, Akenten CW, et al. Clonal clusters, molecular resistance mechanisms and virulence factors of gram-negative bacteria isolated from chronic wounds in Ghana. 2021;10:339. https://doi.org/10.3390/antibiotics10030339 .
Pang M, Zhu M, Lei X, Xu P, Cheng B. Microbiome imbalances: an overlooked potential mechanism in chronic nonhealing wounds. Int J Low Extrem Wounds. 2019;18:31–41.
doi: 10.1177/1534734619832754
pubmed: 30836811
Ammons MCB, Morrissey K, Tripet BP, Van Leuven JT, Han A, Lazarus GS, et al. Biochemical association of metabolic profile and microbiome in chronic pressure ulcer wounds. PLoS ONE. 2015;10:1–22.
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0126735
Moysidis M, Stavrou G, Cheva A, Abba Deka I, Tsetis JK, Birba V, et al. The 3-D configuration of excisional skin wound healing after topical probiotic application. Injury. 2022;53:1385–93. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.injury.2022.02.006 .
Tarapatzi G, Filidou E, Kandilogiannakis L, Spathakis M, Gaitanidou M, Arvanitidis K, et al. The probiotic strains Bifidοbacterium lactis, Lactobacillus acidophilus, Lactiplantibacillus plantarum and Saccharomyces boulardii regulate wound healing and chemokine responses in human intestinal subepithelial myofibroblasts. Pharmaceuticals. 2022;15:1293.
Plumet L, Morsli M, Ahmad-Mansour N, Clavijo-Coppens F, Berry L, Sotto A, et al. Isolation and characterization of new bacteriophages against staphylococcal clinical isolates from diabetic foot ulcers. Viruses 2023;15:2287. https://doi.org/10.3390/v15122287 .
Karkhanis AV, Lee S, Chan J, Navasankari R, Farissa A, Afandi B, et al. Poster ID 238/(N) metabolimic biomarkers dicovery of chronc venous leg and diabetic foot ulcers in an Asian population 2022;2–3. Available from: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/359279208_Metabolomic_Biomarker_Discovery_of_Chronic_Venous_Leg_and_Diabetic_Foot_Ulcers_in_Asian_Population .
Jost G, Schwendener S, Liassine N, Perreten V. Methicillin-resistant Macrococcus canis in a human wound. Infect Genet Evol. 2021;96:105125.
Whittle E, Yonkus JA, Jeraldo P, Alva-Ruiz R, Nelson H, Kendrick ML, et al. Optimizing nanopore sequencing for rapid detection of microbial species and antimicrobial resistance in patients at risk of surgical site infections. mSphere. 2022;7:e0096421.