ArticlePLoS neglected tropical diseases2025
Antimicrobial resistant bacteria isolated from Buruli ulcer lesions in Ghana.
Article in PLoS neglected tropical diseases, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- High-dose rifampicin and clarithromycin for 4 weeks versus standard-dose rifampicin and clarithromycin for 8 weeks to treat Buruli ulcer: An open-label, individually randomized, controlled trial in Ghana.PLoS neglected tropical diseases · 2026Trial
- Design, synthesis, and antibacterial efficacy of new methylene disalicylic acid/1,3,4-oxadiazole hybrids as dual inhibitors of DNA gyrase and topoisomerase IV.Molecular diversity · 2026Article
- Buruli ulcer.Nature reviews. Disease primers · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundWe previously showed that the presence of secondary bacteria influences clinical outcome in Buruli ulcer (BU) patients. Despite this, there is limited data on the antimicrobial resistance of these bacterial isolates within BU lesions. To gain understanding of antimicrobial resistance in BU, we longitudinally profiled antimicrobial resistance in frequently isolated bacterial organisms from these lesions. METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL
findingsBetween August 2021 and June 2024, we assessed the antimicrobial resistance of pathogenic bacterial isolates within lesions of laboratory confirmed BU patients in Ghana. Wound swabs were collected longitudinally. The bacteria were identified and their antibiotic susceptibility tested using the VITEK 2 compact. Of the 166 bacterial isolates, eight bacterial species were identified comprising 56.9% Gram negative bacilli and 43.1% Gram positive cocci. We found the presence of pathogenic bacteria with varying levels of resistance to commonly used antibiotics in BU lesions before, during and after BU-specific antibiotic treatment. At baseline, all bacterial isolates were resistant to at least one antibiotic. Notably, Extended Spectrum Beta-Lactamase (ESBL) production was detected in 30% of Gram-negative isolates tested while 50% of the Staphylococcus aureus isolates tested positive for MRSA. There was a decline in the ESBL positive isolates over time (from 30% to 0) whereas MRSA positive isolates increased after treatment in the lesions (from 50% to 60%). CONCLUSIONS AND SIGNIFICANCE: Results from this study highlight a concerning prevalence of antimicrobial resistant bacteria, including multi drug resistant (MDR), ESBL-positive and Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) pathogens, in Buruli ulcer lesions. These findings underscore the urgent need for the development of integrated guidelines to guide surveillance and treatment of secondary bacterial infections to further improve outcomes in BU.
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.