Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28643380›Full record

ArticleInternational wound journal2017

Microscopy visualisation confirms multi-species biofilms are ubiquitous in diabetic foot ulcers.

Khalid Johani, Matthew Malone, Slade Jensen, Iain Gosbell, Hugh Dickson, Honhua Hu, Karen Vickery

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International wound journal, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 50 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
50citing papers in PubMed
5.4field-weighted citation impact, top 4% 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

50 citing papers in PubMed, 115 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. In Vivo Antimicrobial Activity of Nisin Z AgainstAntibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. 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

7 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Khalid JohaniSurgical Infection Research Group, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Macquarie University, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Matthew MaloneInfectious Diseases and Microbiology, School of Medicine, Western Sydney University, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Slade JensenInfectious Diseases and Microbiology, School of Medicine, Western Sydney University, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Iain GosbellInfectious Diseases and Microbiology, School of Medicine, Western Sydney University, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Hugh DicksonLiverpool Diabetes Collaborative Research Unit, Ingham Institute of Applied Medical Research, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Honhua HuSurgical Infection Research Group, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Macquarie University, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Karen VickerySurgical Infection Research Group, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Macquarie University, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Ingham Institute · AULiverpool Hospital · AUMacquarie University · AURiyadh Armed Forces Hospital · SA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Increasing evidence within the literature has identified the presence of biofilms in chronic wounds and proposed that they contribute to delayed wound healing. This research aimed to investigate the presence of biofilm in diabetic foot ulcers (DFUs) using microscopy and molecular approaches and define if these are predominantly mono- or multi-species. Secondary objectives were to correlate wound observations against microscopy results in ascertaining if clinical cues are useful in detecting wound biofilm. DFU tissue specimens were obtained from 65 subjects. Scanning electron microscopy (SEM) and peptide nucleic acid fluorescent in situ hybridisation (PNA-FISH) techniques with confocal laser scanning microscopy (CLSM) were used to visualise biofilm structures. Next-generation DNA sequencing was performed to explore the microbial diversity. Clinical cues that included the presence of slough, excessive exudate, a gel material on the wound bed that reforms quickly following debridement, poor granulation and pyocyanin were correlated to microscopy results. Of the 65 DFU specimens evaluated by microscopy, all were characterised as containing biofilm (100%, P < 0·001). The presence of both mono-species and multi-species biofilms within the same tissue sections were detected, even when DNA sequencing analysis of DFU specimens revealed diverse polymicrobial communities. No clinical correlations were identified to aid clinicians in identifying wound biofilm. Microscopy visualisation, when combined with molecular approaches, confirms biofilms are ubiquitous in DFUs and form either mono- or multi-species biofilms. Clinical cues to aid clinicians in detecting wound biofilm are not accurate for use in DFUs. A paradigm shift of managing DFUs needs to consider anti-biofilm strategies.

Indexed as

BiofilmsAgedDiabetic FootFemaleHumansIn Situ Hybridization, FluorescenceMaleMicroscopy, ConfocalMicroscopy, Electron, ScanningMiddle AgedPeptide Nucleic AcidsProspective StudiesPeptide Nucleic AcidsBiofilmsDiabetic foot ulcersFluorescent in situ hybridisationMicroscopyScanning electron microscopy

Identifiers

PMID28643380
PMCPMC7949972
OpenAlexW2687607140

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.