ArticleDiabetes therapy : research, treatment and education of diabetes and related disorders2024
Analysis of Distribution and Drug Susceptibility Test Results of Pathogenic Bacteria in Diabetic Foot Ulcers.
Article in Diabetes therapy : research, treatment and education of diabetes and related disorders, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Causes of Bacterial Infections and Antibiotic Resistance Profiles in Patients with Chronic Wounds.Microorganisms · 2026Article
- Analysis of the species distribution and drug resistance of pathogenic microorganisms causing diabetic foot infections in Southwest China from 2020 to 2024: a retrospective cross-sectional analysis.Naunyn-Schmiedeberg's archives of pharmacology · 2026Article
- Predominance of multidrug-resistant bacteria with high resistance to empiric antibiotics in diabetic foot ulcers: a cross-sectional study.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Bacterial pathogen spectrum and antimicrobial resistance in positive pus cultures from hospitalized patients at a maternal and child healthcare specialty hospital in Shenzhen, China, 2021-2025.Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2026Article
- Multifaceted Antibiotic Resistance in Diabetic Foot Infections: A Systematic Review.Microorganisms · 2025Review
- Article
- In vitro evaluation of silver-zinc oxide-eugenol nanocomposite for enhanced antimicrobial and wound healing applications in diabetic conditions.Discover nano · 2025Article
- Multicenter epidemiological distribution, pathogens, and drug-resistance characteristics of chronic osteomyelitis in Central China.Frontiers in public health · 2025Article
- Clinical efficacy of antibiotic-loaded bone cement and negative pressure wound therapy in multidrug-resistant organisms diabetic foot ulcers: a retrospective analysis.Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionThis study aimed to determine the pathogen distribution and drug susceptibility of diabetic foot wound secretions in a tertiary hospital in a coastal area of southeastern China to guide clinical antibiotic selection.
methodsA retrospective analysis was conducted on 212 patients with diabetic foot hospitalized at Xiamen Third Hospital from 2018 to 2023, and foot wound secretions were collected for microbial culture and drug susceptibility testing.
resultsAmong 212 cases of patients with diabetic foot wound secretions, 163 cases (76.9%) were cultured with pathogenic bacteria, and a total of 207 strains of pathogenic bacteria were cultured, including 75 strains (36.23%) of Gram-positive (G+) bacteria, 118 strains of Gram-negative (G-) bacteria (57.00%), 14 strains of fungi (6.76%), 120 cases of single microorganism infection (73.62%), 43 cases of mixed infection (26.38%), and 15 strains of multidrug-resistant bacteria (7.25%). The top three pathogenic bacteria were Staphylococcus aureus, Klebsiella pneumoniae, and Pseudomonas aeruginosa. G+ bacteria were dominated by S. aureus. Drug susceptibility results showed that G+ bacteria were highly susceptible to vancomycin, linezolid, tigecycline, quinupristin/dalfopristin, rifampicin, and furotoxin, and somewhat resistant to penicillin, erythromycin, clindamycin, and cefoxitin. Among G- bacterial infections, Klebsiella pneumoniae, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, Escherichia coli, and Proteus were the major species. Drug susceptibility testing indicated that carbapenems such as imipenem and ertapenem were the most effective antibacterial drugs against G- strains, followed by amikacin, piperacillin, and tazabactams to which these bacteria were also relatively sensitive, while resistance to penicillins and first-generation cephalosporins increased significantly. We isolated one strain of pathogenic bacteria from a Wagner grade 1 ulcer, which was G+ bacteria. In Wagner grade 2 ulcers, the distribution of pathogenic bacteria was mainly G+ bacteria. In Wagner grade 3 and 4 ulcers, the distribution of pathogenic bacteria was mainly G- bacteria, and the increased rate of mixed infection was mainly due to mixed infection of G+ and G-. Two strains of pathogenic bacteria were isolated at Wagner grade 5, which were mixed infections of G+ and G-.
conclusionsPathogenic bacteria in diabetic foot wounds are predominantly G- bacteria, followed by G+ bacteria. As the Wagner ulcer grade increases, the distribution of pathogenic bacteria changes from G+ bacteria to G- bacteria, and the mixed infection rate increases. G+ bacteria are highly susceptible to vancomycin, linezolid, tigecycline, quinupristin/dalfopristin, rifampicin, and furotoxin, and somewhat resistant to penicillin, erythromycin, clindamycin, and cefoxitin. G- bacteria are more sensitive to the antimicrobial drugs ertapenem, imipenem, amikacin, piperacillin tazobactam, and have high resistance to penicillin and first-generation cephalosporins.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.