Journals / Türk Mikrobiyoloji Cemiyeti Dergisi / 2017 / Cilt: 47 - Sayı: 1

Bacterial Agents in Diabetic Foot Infections and Their Biofilm Formation Rates

Diyabetik Ayak Enfeksiyonlarında Etken Bakteriler ve Biyofilm Oluşturma Oranları

Pages
33–38
Publication Date
2022-11-05
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

We found that biofilm was produced by many typesof organisms, but it was particularly more common inStaphylococcus and Pseudomonas species.Conclusion: We believe that our work is important in thatit emphasizes the need to develop therapeutic strategies toeliminate and/or prevent biofilm formation in diabetic footinfection.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Bacterial Agents in Diabetic Foot Infections and TheirBiofilm Formation RatesObjective: The wound bed is an ideal surface for bacterialgrowth, and the deleterious effects of microbial infectionon wound healing are recognized.
📊
Key Findings & Data:The aim of our study was to determine thebacteria and biofilm formation rates in diabetic foot.Material and Method: Routine culture samples obtained frominfected diabetic ulcers were evaluated in Infection Diseasesand Clinical Microbiology laboratory between 2013-2015.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:We found that biofilm was produced by many typesof organisms, but it was particularly more common inStaphylococcus and Pseudomonas species.Conclusion: We believe that our work is important in thatit emphasizes the need to develop therapeutic strategies toeliminate and/or prevent biofilm formation in diabetic footinfection.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:2013-2015 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

Bacterial Agents in Diabetic Foot Infections and TheirBiofilm Formation RatesObjective: The wound bed is an ideal surface for bacterialgrowth, and the deleterious effects of microbial infectionon wound healing are recognized. Bacteria adhere toalmost all types of surfaces, and form complex structurescalled biofilms. The aim of our study was to determine thebacteria and biofilm formation rates in diabetic foot.Material and Method: Routine culture samples obtained frominfected diabetic ulcers were evaluated in Infection Diseasesand Clinical Microbiology laboratory between 2013-2015. Wecollected specimens for culture by debridement of the softtissue and / or bone biopsy and effective bacterial agents wereidentified by using standard culture, and identificationmethods. The production of biofilm was studied by quantitativemicrodilution plate method.Results: We isolated a total of 81 causative bacteria fromsoft and/or bone tissue samples in 55 patients. The mostfrequently isolated species was Pseudomonas (n=16;19.8%). Sixty seven (82.7%) of 81 isolates producedbiofilm. We found that biofilm was produced by many typesof organisms, but it was particularly more common inStaphylococcus and Pseudomonas species.Conclusion: We believe that our work is important in thatit emphasizes the need to develop therapeutic strategies toeliminate and/or prevent biofilm formation in diabetic footinfection.

Özet

Amaç: Yara yatağı bakterilerin üremesi için ideal bir yüzeydir ve mikrobiyal enfeksiyonun yara iyileşmesi üzerindeki olumsuz etkileri bilinmektedir. Bakteriler hemen her türlü yüzeye yapışarak, biyofilm olarak adlandırılan kompleks yapılı topluluklar oluştururlar. Çalışmamızın amacı diyabetik ayak enfeksiyonuna neden olan etkenleri ve biyofilm oluşturma oranlarını saptamaktır. Gereç ve Yöntem: Enfekte diyabetik ülserlerinden alınan rutin kültür örnekleri, 2013-2015 yılları arasında Enfeksiyon Hastalıkları ve Klinik Mikrobiyoloji Laboratuvarı'nda değerlendirildi. Kültür için örnekler, yumuşak doku debridmanı ve/veya kemik biyopsisi ile toplandı ve standart kültür ve tanımlama yöntemleri kullanılarak etken bakteriler tanımlandı. Biyofilm üretimi kantitatif mikrodilüsyon plak yöntemi ile saptandı. Bulgular: Toplam 55 hastanın yumuşak ve/veya kemik dokusu örneklerinden 81 etken bakteri izole edildi. En sık izole edilen bakteri Pseudomonas spp. (n=16; %19.8) idi. Biyofilm oluşumu 67 izolatta (%82.7) saptandı. Birçok mikroorganizma türünde biyofilm oluşumu görülmekle birlikte, özellikle Staphylococcus ve Pseudomonas türlerinde daha yaygın olduğu gözlendi. Sonuç: Çalışmalarımız diyabetik ayak enfeksiyonu etkenlerinin biyofilm oluşturmasını önlemek veya biyofilmi ortadan kaldırmak için tedavi stratejilerinin geliştirilmesi gereksinimini vurgulaması bakımından önem taşımaktadır

🔖

Cite This Article

ERTUĞRUL, M. B., ÖZTÜRK, Ş. B., ÇÖREKLİ, E. (2022). Bacterial Agents in Diabetic Foot Infections and Their Biofilm Formation Rates. Türk Mikrobiyoloji Cemiyeti Dergisi, Cilt: 47 - Sayı: 1, 33–38. https://ajindex.com/articles/635883

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (15)

  1. Cavanagh PR, Lipsky BA, Bradbury AW, Botek G. Treatment for diabetic foot ulcers. Lancet 2005; 366:1725-35.
  2. Lipsky BA, Berendt AR, Embil J, De Lalla F. Diagnosing and treating diabetic foot infections. Diabetes Metab Res Rev 2004; 20(Suppl 1):S56-64.
  3. Singh N, Armstrong DG, Lipsky BA. Preventing foot ulcers in patients with diabetes. JAMA 2005; 293:217-28.
  4. Falanga V. The chronic wound: impaired healing and solutions in the context of wound bed preparation. Blood Cells Mol Dis 2004; 32:88-94.
  5. James GA, Swogger E, Wolcott R, et al. Biofilms in chronic wounds. Wound Repair Regen 2008; 16:37-44.
  6. Branda SS, Vik S, Friedman L, Kolter R. Biofilms: the matrix revisited. Trends Microbiol 2005; 13:20-6.
  7. Hall-Stoodley L, Stoodley P. Evolving concepts in biofilm infections. Cell Microbiol 2009; 11:1034-43.
  8. Spormann AM. Physiology of microbes in biofilms. Curr Top Microbiol Immunol 2008; 322:17-36.
  9. Stewart PS, Franklin MJ. Physiological heterogeneity in biofilms. Nat Rev Microbiol 2008; 6:199-210.
  10. Mah TF, O’Toole GA. Mechanisms of biofilm resistance to antimicrobial agents. Trends Microbiol 2001; 9:34-9.
  11. Matz C, Kjelleberg S. Off the hook-how bacteria survive protozoan grazing. Trends Microbiol 2005; 13:302-7.
  12. Anderson GG, O’Toole GA. Innate and induced resistance mechanisms of bacterial biofilms. Curr Top Microbiol Immunol 2008; 322:85-105.
  13. Serralta VW, Harrison-Balestra C, Cazzaniga AL, Davis SC, Mertz PM. Lifestyles of bacteria in wounds: Presence of biofilms? Wounds 2001; 13:29-34
  14. Bello YM, Falabella AF, Cazzaniga AL, HarrisonBalestra C, Mertz PM. Are biofilms present in human chronic wounds? “Symposium on Advanced Wound Care and Medical Research Forum on Wound Repair” simpozyumu, Las Vegas, NV, ABD, Nisan 2001
  15. Percival S, Bowler P. Understanding the effects of bacterial communities and biofilms on wound healing. World Wide Wounds 2004, http://www.worldwidewounds.com/2004/july/Percival/Community-InteractionsWou