Literature DB >> 22332606

Understanding the host inflammatory response to wound infection: an in vivo study of Klebsiella pneumoniae in a rabbit ear wound model.

Akhil K Seth1, Matthew R Geringer, Anandev N Gurjala, Johnathan A Abercrombie, Ping Chen, Tao You, Seok J Hong, Robert D Galiano, Thomas A Mustoe, Kai P Leung.   

Abstract

Wound infection development is critically dependent on the complex interactions between bacteria and host. Klebsiella pneumoniae has become an increasingly common wound pathogen, but its natural history within wounds has never been studied. Using a validated, in vivo rabbit ear model, wounds were inoculated with K. pneumoniae at different concentrations (10²-10⁷ colony-forming units) with measurement of viable and nonviable bacterial counts, histological wound-healing parameters, and host inflammatory gene expression at multiple time points postinoculation (48, 96, and 240 hours). Bacteria and wound morphologies were evaluated with scanning electron microscopy. Comparable experiments were performed in ischemic ears to model immune response impairment. All wounds, despite different inoculants, equilibrated to similar bacterial concentrations by 96 hours. With a 10⁶ colony-forming units inoculant, wounds at 240 hours showed decreased bacterial counts (p < 0.01), with a corresponding improvement in healing (p < 0.01) and a decrease in inflammatory response (p < 0.05). In contrast, ischemic wounds revealed impaired inflammatory gene expression (p < 0.05) resulting in higher steady-state bacterial concentrations (p < 0.01), impaired healing (p < 0.05), and biofilm formation on scanning electron microscopy. We conclude that a normal inflammatory response can effectively stabilize and overcome a K. pneumoniae wound infection. An impaired host cannot control this bacterial burden, preventing adequate healing while allowing bacteria to establish a chronic presence. Our novel study quantitatively validates the host immune response as integral to wound infection dynamics.
© 2012 by the Wound Healing Society.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22332606     DOI: 10.1111/j.1524-475X.2012.00764.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Wound Repair Regen        ISSN: 1067-1927            Impact factor:   3.617


  6 in total

Review 1.  Biofilms and Wounds: An Overview of the Evidence.

Authors:  Steven L Percival; Sara M McCarty; Benjamin Lipsky
Journal:  Adv Wound Care (New Rochelle)       Date:  2015-07-01       Impact factor: 4.730

Review 2.  Chronic Wound Biofilm Model.

Authors:  Kasturi Ganesh; Mithun Sinha; Shomita S Mathew-Steiner; Amitava Das; Sashwati Roy; Chandan K Sen
Journal:  Adv Wound Care (New Rochelle)       Date:  2015-07-01       Impact factor: 4.730

Review 3.  Biofilms and Inflammation in Chronic Wounds.

Authors:  Ge Zhao; Marcia L Usui; Soyeon I Lippman; Garth A James; Philip S Stewart; Philip Fleckman; John E Olerud
Journal:  Adv Wound Care (New Rochelle)       Date:  2013-09       Impact factor: 4.730

4.  Comparative analysis of single-species and polybacterial wound biofilms using a quantitative, in vivo, rabbit ear model.

Authors:  Akhil K Seth; Matthew R Geringer; Seok J Hong; Kai P Leung; Robert D Galiano; Thomas A Mustoe
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2012-08-08       Impact factor: 3.240

5.  Dermal wound transcriptomic responses to Infection with Pseudomonas aeruginosa versus Klebsiella pneumoniae in a rabbit ear wound model.

Authors:  Kai P Leung; Peter D'Arpa; Akhil K Seth; Matthew R Geringer; Marti Jett; Wei Xu; Seok J Hong; Robert D Galiano; Tsute Chen; Thomas A Mustoe
Journal:  BMC Clin Pathol       Date:  2014-05-02

6.  Biofilm delays wound healing: A review of the evidence.

Authors:  Daniel G Metcalf; Philip G Bowler
Journal:  Burns Trauma       Date:  2013-06-18
  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.