Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33228639›Full record

ReviewBMC medicine2020

The dynamic wound microbiome.

Chunan Liu, Alise J Ponsero, David G Armstrong, Benjamin A Lipsky, Bonnie L Hurwitz

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in BMC medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 42 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
42citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
5.7field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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

42 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 63 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. S1 Guideline on Infected Interdigital Intertrigo (also called Gram-Negative Toe Web Infection).Journal der Deutschen Dermatologischen Gesellschaft = Journal of the German Society of Dermatology : JDDG · 2026
    Guideline
  2. Review
  3. The dual role of the microbiome in chronic wound management.Cell communication and signaling : CCS · 2026
    Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Review
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

5 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Chunan LiuDepartment of Biosystems Engineering, University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ, USA.
Alise J PonseroDepartment of Biosystems Engineering, University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ, USA.
David G ArmstrongDepartment of Surgery, Southwestern Academic Limb Salvage Alliance (SALSA), Keck School of Medicine of University of Southern California, Los Angeles, USA.
Benjamin A LipskyDepartment of Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA.
Bonnie L HurwitzDepartment of Biosystems Engineering, University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ, USA. bhurwitz@email.arizona.edu.
University of Arizona · USUniversity of Southern California · USUniversity of Washington · US

Funding

Southern California Clinical and Translational Science InstituteUL1TR001855 · NCATS · UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA · PI Thomas A Buchanan, Michele D. Kipke · 2016 to 2026
$81.3M
NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR001855
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDiabetic foot ulcers (DFUs) account for the majority of all limb amputations and hospitalizations due to diabetes complications. With 30 million cases of diabetes in the USA and 500,000 new diagnoses each year, DFUs are a growing health problem. Diabetes patients with limb amputations have high postoperative mortality, a high rate of secondary amputation, prolonged inpatient hospital stays, and a high incidence of re-hospitalization. DFU-associated amputations constitute a significant burden on healthcare resources that cost more than 10 billion dollars per year. Currently, there is no way to identify wounds that will heal versus those that will become severely infected and require amputation. MAIN BODY: Accurate identification of causative pathogens in diabetic foot ulcers is a critical component of effective treatment. Compared to traditional culture-based methods, advanced sequencing technologies provide more comprehensive and unbiased profiling on wound microbiome with a higher taxonomic resolution, as well as functional annotation such as virulence and antibiotic resistance. In this review, we summarize the latest developments in defining the microbiology of diabetic foot ulcers that have been unveiled by sequencing technologies and discuss both the future promises and current limitations of these approaches. In particular, we highlight the temporal patterns and system dynamics in the diabetic foot microbiome monitored and measured during wound progression and medical intervention, and explore the feasibility of molecular diagnostics in clinics.

conclusionMolecular tests conducted during weekly office visits to clean and examine DFUs would allow clinicians to offer personalized treatment and antibiotic therapy. Personalized wound management could reduce healthcare costs, improve quality of life for patients, and recoup lost productivity that is important not only to the patient, but also to healthcare payers and providers. These efforts could also improve antibiotic stewardship and control the rise of "superbugs" vital to global health.

Indexed as

Diabetic FootFemaleHigh-Throughput Nucleotide SequencingHumansMaleMetabolomicsMicrobiotaDiabetic foot ulcerMetagenomicsNext-generation sequencingWound microbiome

Identifiers

PMID33228639
PMCPMC7685579
OpenAlexW3107188434

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.