ArticleAesthetic plastic surgery2026
Exploring the Skin Mycobiome: A Comparison of Skin Swabs and Tissue Specimens.
Article in Aesthetic plastic surgery, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Recent research has underscored the significant role of skin fungi in human health and disease. The advent of next-generation sequencing has facilitated the identification of previously unrecognized fungi; however, a standardized sampling method for the skin mycobiome has yet to be established. Given that fungi are distributed across all layers of the skin, this study aimed to establish and compare the fungal profiles obtained from paired skin swabs (skin surface) and tissue specimens (skin dermis), utilizing ITS rRNA gene sequencing. Fungal diversity and composition varied between swabs and tissue specimens from the same individual. Tissue specimens exhibited greater fungal diversity relative to skin swabs, as indicated by the Chao1 estimator (P=0.028) and Shannon index (P=0.0136). Notably, Malassezia species was more abundant in swabs (P=0.002), whereas Trichoderma species was more prevalent in tissue samples (P=0.0001). Compared to swabs, tissue sampling also demonstrated superior sensitivity in detecting non-Malassezia species. These findings suggest that skin swabs and tissue specimens provide different views of the skin mycobiome: Swabs are effective for studies targeting surface-dwelling fungi, while tissue sampling remains necessary when investigating deeper skin fungi and potential systemic infections. Future research should carefully consider appropriate sampling method based on target fungal location to mitigate procedural artifacts.Level of Evidence III This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266 .
Indexed as
Identifiers
41857162What 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.