K Johani1, B G Fritz2, T Bjarnsholt3, B A Lipsky4, S O Jensen5, M Yang6, A Dean6, H Hu1, K Vickery1, M Malone7. 1. Surgical Infection Research Group, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Macquarie University, Sydney, Australia. 2. University of Copenhagen, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, Department of Immunology and Microbiology, Costerton Biofilm Center, Denmark. 3. University of Copenhagen, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, Department of Immunology and Microbiology, Costerton Biofilm Center, Denmark; Department of Clinical Microbiology, Rigshospitalet, Denmark. 4. Oxford Microbiology and Infectious Diseases, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK. 5. Infectious Diseases and Microbiology, School of Medicine, Western Sydney University, Australia. 6. Liverpool Hospital, South Western Sydney LHD, Sydney, Australia. 7. Infectious Diseases and Microbiology, School of Medicine, Western Sydney University, Australia; Liverpool Hospital, South Western Sydney LHD, Sydney, Australia; Liverpool Diabetes Collaborative Research Unit, Ingham Institute of Applied Medical Research, Sydney, Australia. Electronic address: matthew.malone@health.nsw.gov.au.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Rigorous visual evidence on whether or not biofilms are involved in diabetic foot osteomyelitis (DFO) is lacking. We employed a suite of molecular and microscopic approaches to investigate the microbiome, and phenotypic state of microorganisms involved in DFO. METHODS: In 20 consecutive subjects with suspected DFO, we collected intraoperative bone specimens. To explore the microbial diversity present in infected bone we performed next generation DNA sequencing. We used scanning electron microscopy (SEM) and peptide nucleic acid fluorescent in situ hybridization (PNA-FISH) with confocal microscopy to visualize and confirm the presence of biofilms. RESULTS: In 19 of 20 (95%) studied patients presenting with DFO, it was associated with an infected diabetic foot ulcer. By DNA sequencing of infected bone, Corynebacterium sp. was the most commonly identified microorganism, followed by Finegoldia sp., Staphylococcus sp., Streptococcus sp., Porphyromonas sp., and Anaerococcus sp. Six of 20 bone samples (30%) contained only one or two pathogens, while the remaining 14 (70%) had polymicrobial communities. Using a combination of SEM and PNA-FISH, we identified microbial aggregates in biofilms in 16 (80%) bone specimens and found that they were typically coccoid or rod-shaped aggregates. CONCLUSIONS: The presence of biofilms in DFO may explain why non-surgical treatment of DFO, relying on systemic antibiotic therapy, may not resolve some chronic infections caused by biofilm-producing strains.
OBJECTIVES: Rigorous visual evidence on whether or not biofilms are involved in diabetic foot osteomyelitis (DFO) is lacking. We employed a suite of molecular and microscopic approaches to investigate the microbiome, and phenotypic state of microorganisms involved in DFO. METHODS: In 20 consecutive subjects with suspected DFO, we collected intraoperative bone specimens. To explore the microbial diversity present in infected bone we performed next generation DNA sequencing. We used scanning electron microscopy (SEM) and peptide nucleic acid fluorescent in situ hybridization (PNA-FISH) with confocal microscopy to visualize and confirm the presence of biofilms. RESULTS: In 19 of 20 (95%) studied patients presenting with DFO, it was associated with an infected diabetic foot ulcer. By DNA sequencing of infected bone, Corynebacterium sp. was the most commonly identified microorganism, followed by Finegoldia sp., Staphylococcus sp., Streptococcus sp., Porphyromonas sp., and Anaerococcus sp. Six of 20 bone samples (30%) contained only one or two pathogens, while the remaining 14 (70%) had polymicrobial communities. Using a combination of SEM and PNA-FISH, we identified microbial aggregates in biofilms in 16 (80%) bone specimens and found that they were typically coccoid or rod-shaped aggregates. CONCLUSIONS: The presence of biofilms in DFO may explain why non-surgical treatment of DFO, relying on systemic antibiotic therapy, may not resolve some chronic infections caused by biofilm-producing strains.
Authors: Ida Clement Thaarup; Anne Kristine Servais Iversen; Mads Lichtenberg; Thomas Bjarnsholt; Tim Holm Jakobsen Journal: Microorganisms Date: 2022-04-05
Authors: Angeliki M Andrianaki; Christos Koutserimpas; Alexandros Kafetzakis; Emmanouil Tavlas; Sofia Maraki; John A Papadakis; Petros Ioannou; George Samonis; Diamantis P Kofteridis Journal: Germs Date: 2020-12-28
Authors: Matthew Malone; Michael Radzieta; Saskia Schwarzer; Slade O Jensen; Lawrence A Lavery Journal: Int Wound J Date: 2021-01-21 Impact factor: 3.315
Authors: Michael Radzieta; Matthew Malone; Mehtab Ahmad; Hugh G Dickson; Saskia Schwarzer; Slade O Jensen; Lawrence A Lavery Journal: Front Microbiol Date: 2022-08-01 Impact factor: 6.064