...
  • 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>BMC Infectious Diseases >Clinical identification of bacteria in human chronic wound infections: culturing vs. 16S ribosomal DNA sequencing
【24h】

Clinical identification of bacteria in human chronic wound infections: culturing vs. 16S ribosomal DNA sequencing

机译：人慢性伤口感染细菌的临床鉴定：培养与16S核糖体DNA测序

获取原文
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

Background Chronic wounds affect millions of people and cost billions of dollars in the United States each year. These wounds harbor polymicrobial biofilm communities, which can be difficult to elucidate using culturing methods. Clinical molecular microbiological methods are increasingly being employed to investigate the microbiota of chronic infections, including wounds, as part of standard patient care. However, molecular testing is more sensitive than culturing, which results in markedly different results being reported to clinicians. This study compares the results of aerobic culturing and molecular testing (culture-free 16S ribosomal DNA sequencing), and it examines the relative abundance score that is generated by the molecular test and the usefulness of the relative abundance score in predicting the likelihood that the same organism would be detected by culture. Methods Parallel samples from 51 chronic wounds were studied using aerobic culturing and 16S DNA sequencing for the identification of bacteria. Results One hundred forty-five (145) unique genera were identified using molecular methods, and 68 of these genera were aerotolerant. Fourteen (14) unique genera were identified using aerobic culture methods. One-third (31/92) of the cultures were determined to be?Staphylococcus aureus, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, and Enterococcus faecalis) with higher relative abundance scores were more likely to be detected by culture as demonstrated with regression modeling. Conclusion Discordance between molecular and culture testing is often observed. However, culture-free 16S ribosomal DNA sequencing and its relative abundance score can provide clinicians with insight into which bacteria are most abundant in a sample and which are most likely to be detected by culture.
机译：背景背景慢性伤口影响数百万人，每年在美国的成本数十亿美元。这些伤口港口含有多元化生物膜群落，这可能难以使用培养方法阐明。临床分子微生物方法越来越多地用于研究慢性感染的微生物群，包括伤口，作为标准患者护理的一部分。然而，分子测试比培养更敏感，导致临床医生报告显着不同的结果。该研究比较了有氧培养和分子检测的结果（无培养16S核糖体DNA测序），并且它检查了通过分子试验产生的相对丰度分数和相对丰富得分的有用性在预测相同的可能性方面将通过文化来检测生物体。方法使用有氧培养和16S DNA测序研究了来自51慢性伤口的并行样品，用于鉴定细菌。结果使用分子方法鉴定一百四十五（145）个独特的属，这些属的68个是erotolerent。使用有氧培养方法鉴定了十四（14）个独特的属。培养物的培养物中的三分之一（31/92）培养物，假霉菌铜绿素，假麦芽糖菌，粪孢菌，粪便粪便，如回归建模所证明的培养物更可能检测相对丰度得分。结论经常观察到分子和培养检测之间的不间断。然而，无培养的16S核糖体DNA测序及其相对丰富的分数可以提供临床医生，其中细菌在样品中最丰富，最有可能被培养物检测。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号