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

BMC Infectious Diseases

Randall D Wolcott³  Yan Sun²  Eric J Rees²  Stephen B Cox²  Daniel D Rhoads¹ 

[1] Department of Pathology, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center (UPMC), Pittsburgh, PA, USA;Research and Testing Laboratory (RTL), Lubbock, TX, USA;PathoGenius Laboratories (PGL), Lubbock, TX, USA

关键词: 16S;    Microbiology;    Bacteria;    Molecular diagnostic techniques;    Diabetic foot;    Pressure ulcer;   

Others  :  1175131
DOI  :  10.1186/1471-2334-12-321

 received in 2012-04-19, accepted in 2012-11-05,  发布年份 2012

【 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 < 1% of the relative abundance of the wound microbiota using molecular testing. At the genus level, molecular testing identified 85% (78/92) of the bacteria that were identified by culture. Conversely, culturing detected 15.7% (78/497) of the aerotolerant bacteria and detected 54.9% of the collective aerotolerant relative abundance of the samples. Aerotolerant bacterial genera (and individual species including 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.

【 授权许可】

   
2012 Rhoads et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

【 图 表 】

Figure 1.

Figure 2.

Figure 3.

Figure 4.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Tomic-Canic M, Ayello EA, Stojadinovic O, Golinko MS, Brem H: Using gene transcription patterns (bar coding scans) to guide wound debridement and healing. Adv Skin Wound Care 2008, 21(10):487-492. quiz 493-484
• [2]Dowd SE, Sun Y, Secor PR, Rhoads DD, Wolcott BM, James GA, Wolcott RD: Survey of bacterial diversity in chronic wounds using pyrosequencing, DGGE, and full ribosome shotgun sequencing. BMC Microbiol 2008, 8:43. BioMed Central Full Text
• [3]Rhoads DD, Wolcott RD, Percival SL: Biofilms in wounds: management strategies. J Wound Care 2008, 17(11):502-508.
• [4]James GA, Swogger E, Wolcott R, Pulcini E, Secor P, Sestrich J, Costerton JW, Stewart PS: Biofilms in chronic wounds. Wound Repair Regen 2008, 16(1):37-44.
• [5]Kirketerp-Moller K, Jensen PO, Fazli M, Madsen KG, Pedersen J, Moser C, Tolker-Nielsen T, Hoiby N, Givskov M, Bjarnsholt T: Distribution, organization, and ecology of bacteria in chronic wounds. J Clin Microbiol 2008, 46(8):2717-2722.
• [6]Martin JM, Zenilman JM, Lazarus GS: Molecular microbiology: new dimensions for cutaneous biology and wound healing. J Invest Dermatol 2010, 130(1):38-48.
• [7]Melendez JH, Frankel YM, An AT, Williams L, Price LB, Wang NY, Lazarus GS, Zenilman JM: Real-time PCR assays compared to culture-based approaches for identification of aerobic bacteria in chronic wounds. Clin Microbiol Infect 2010, 16(12):1762-1769.
• [8]Price LB, Liu CM, Melendez JH, Frankel YM, Engelthaler D, Aziz M, Bowers J, Rattray R, Ravel J, Kingsley C, et al.: Community analysis of chronic wound bacteria using 16S rRNA gene-based pyrosequencing: impact of diabetes and antibiotics on chronic wound microbiota. PLoS One 2009, 4(7):e6462.
• [9]Rhoads DD, Wolcott RD, Sun Y, Dowd SE: Comparison of culture and molecular identification of bacteria in chronic wounds. Int J Mol Sci 2012, 13(3):2535-2550.
• [10]Thomsen TR, Aasholm MS, Rudkjobing VB, Saunders AM, Bjarnsholt T, Givskov M, Kirketerp-Moller K, Nielsen PH: The bacteriology of chronic venous leg ulcer examined by culture-independent molecular methods. Wound Repair Regen 2010, 18(1):38-49.
• [11]Percival SL, Thomas JG, Williams DW: Biofilms and bacterial imbalances in chronic wounds: anti-Koch. Int Wound J 2010, 7(3):169-175.
• [12]Hall-Stoodley L, Stoodley P, Kathju S, Hoiby N, Moser C, William Costerton J, Moter A, Bjarnsholt T: Towards Diagnostic Guidelines for Biofilm-Associated Infections. FEMS Immunol Med Microbiol 2012, 65(2):127-145.
• [13]Bowler PG, Davies BJ: The microbiology of infected and noninfected leg ulcers. Int J Dermatol 1999, 38(8):573-578.
• [14]Sibley CD, Grinwis ME, Field TR, Eshaghurshan CS, Faria MM, Dowd SE, Parkins MD, Rabin HR, Surette MG: Culture enriched molecular profiling of the cystic fibrosis airway microbiome. PLoS One 2011, 6(7):e22702.
• [15]Oliver JD: Recent findings on the viable but nonculturable state in pathogenic bacteria. FEMS Microbiol Rev 2010, 34(4):415-425.
• [16]Dowd SE, Wolcott RD, Kennedy J, Jones C, Cox SB: Molecular diagnostics and personalised medicine in wound care: assessment of outcomes. J Wound Care 2011, 20(5):232. 234-239
• [17]Wolcott RD, Cox SB, Dowd SE: Healing and healing rates of chronic wounds in the age of molecular pathogen diagnostics. J Wound Care 2010, 19(7):272-278. 280-271