Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24839608›Full record

ArticleJournal of diabetes research2014

The visualization of biofilms in chronic diabetic foot wounds using routine diagnostic microscopy methods.

Angela Oates, Frank L Bowling, Andrew J M Boulton, Philip G Bowler, Daniel G Metcalf, Andrew J McBain

Open access · goldAbstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of diabetes research, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 33 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
33citing papers in PubMed
3.2field-weighted citation impact, top 8% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

33 citing papers in PubMed, 67 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Ciprofloxacin enhances the biofilm formation ofFrontiers in microbiology · 2023
    Article
  10. Frontiers in microbiology · 2023
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Diagnostics for Wound Infections.Advances in wound care · 2021
    Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Angela OatesManchester Pharmacy School, The University of Manchester, Oxford Road, Manchester M13 9PT, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-0519-4556
Frank L BowlingDepartment of Medicine Manchester Royal Infirmary, The University of Manchester, Oxford Road, Manchester M13 9PT, UK.
Andrew J M BoultonDepartment of Medicine Manchester Royal Infirmary, The University of Manchester, Oxford Road, Manchester M13 9PT, UK.
Philip G BowlerConvaTec Ltd., Deeside CH5 2NU, UK.
Daniel G MetcalfConvaTec Ltd., Deeside CH5 2NU, UK.
Andrew J McBainManchester Pharmacy School, The University of Manchester, Oxford Road, Manchester M13 9PT, UK.
ConvaTec (United Kingdom) · GBManchester Royal Infirmary · GBUniversity of Manchester · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Diabetic foot wounds are commonly colonised by taxonomically diverse microbial communities and may additionally be infected with specific pathogens. Since biofilms are demonstrably less susceptible to antimicrobial agents than are planktonic bacteria, and may be present in chronic wounds, there is increasing interest in their aetiological role. In the current investigation, the presence of structured microbial assemblages in chronic diabetic foot wounds is demonstrated using several visualization methods. Debridement samples, collected from the foot wounds of diabetic patients, were histologically sectioned and examined using bright-field, fluorescence, and environmental scanning electron microscopy and assessed by quantitative differential viable counting. All samples (n = 26) harboured bioburdens in excess of 5 log₁₀ CFU/g. Microcolonies were identified in 4/4 samples by all three microscopy methods, although bright-field and fluorescence microscopy were more effective at highlighting putative biofilm morphology than ESEM. Results in this pilot study indicate that bacterial microcolonies and putative biofilm matrix can be visualized in chronic wounds using fluorescence microscopy and ESEM, but also using the simple Gram stain.

Indexed as

BiofilmsColony Count, MicrobialDebridementDiabetic FootEnterobacteriaceaeGentian VioletGram-Negative BacteriaGram-Negative Bacterial InfectionsGram-Positive BacteriaGram-Positive Bacterial InfectionsHumansIn Situ Hybridization, FluorescenceMicrobial ViabilityMicroscopy, Electron, ScanningPhenazinesPilot ProjectsGentian VioletGram's stainPhenazines

Identifiers

PMID24839608
PMCPMC4009286
OpenAlexW1985272469

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.