CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 123Wound Healing and TreatmentsMicrobial Community Ecology and PhysiologyGut microbiota and health

Microbial diversity in chronic open wounds

Frank, Daniel N., Wysocki, Annette, Specht‐Glick, Dee Dee, Rooney, Alejandro, Feldman, Robert A., St. Amand, Allison L., Pace, Norman R., Trent, Jonathan D.·2009·Wound Repair and Regeneration
DOI 10.1111/j.1524-475x.2009.00472.x
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Chronic wounds expose the dermal matrix and underlying tissue to a diversity of microbes from the body and surrounding environment. We determined the microbial diversity of 19 chronic wounds using both molecular methods (sequence analysis of rRNA genes) and routine clinical culturing methods using swab samples. We identified 93 phylotypes in 2,653 rRNA clone sequences and found that compared with other environments, the microbial diversity of chronic wounds is relatively well characterized, i.e., 95% of sequences have ≥97% identity with known human commensals. In total, 75% of sequences belonged to four well‐known wound‐associated phylotypes: Staphylococcus (25%), Corynebacterium (20%), Clostridiales (18%), and Pseudomonas (12%). Approximately 0.5% of sequences (seven phylotypes) belonged to potentially new species. Individual wound samples contained four to 22 phylotypes, but in all wounds only a few (one to three) phylotypes were dominant. In more than half the wound specimens, polymerase chain reaction and culturing methods gave different diversity and dominance information about the microbes present. This exploratory study suggests that combining molecular and culturing methods provides a more complete characterization of the microbial diversity of chronic wounds, and can thereby expand our understanding of how microbiology impacts chronic wound pathology and healing.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.1524-475x.2009.00472.x

Cites

38 of 38 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Continued presence of a high bacterial load in wounds results in a sustained influx of pro-inflammatory cells and increased inflammation, leading to delayed healing.

    “In addition, continued presence of a high bacterial load in wounds results in a sustained influx of pro-inflammatory cells and increased inflammation also leading to delayed healing (Fig. 3) (33-35).”

    From Wound repair and regeneration: Mechanisms, signaling, and translation (2014) · cites this paper as [34]

  • Multiple studies have emphasized the presence of bacteria and the polymicrobial nature of chronic, non-healing wounds, and the frequency of S. aureus and P. aeruginosa organisms has been shown to be exceedingly high.

    “Multiple studies have also emphasized the presence of bacteria and the polymicrobial nature of chronic, non-healing wounds [6], [7], [8], [9], [10], and the frequency of S. aureus and P. aeruginosa organisms has been shown to be exceedingly high [10], [11], [12], [13], [14].”

    From Interactions of Methicillin Resistant Staphylococcus aureus USA300 and Pseudomonas aeruginosa in Polymicrobial Wound Infection (2013) · cites this paper as [6]

  • The polymicrobial nature of non-healing wounds, such as venous, pressure, and diabetic foot ulcers, is well documented and established.

    “The polymicrobial nature of non-healing wounds, such as venous, pressure, and diabetic foot ulcers is well documented and established [6], [7], [8], [9], [58], [59].”

    From Interactions of Methicillin Resistant Staphylococcus aureus USA300 and Pseudomonas aeruginosa in Polymicrobial Wound Infection (2013) · cites this paper as [6]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Frank, D. N., Wysocki, A., Specht‐Glick, D. D., Rooney, A., Feldman, R. A., St. Amand, A. L., Pace, N. R., & Trent, J. D.
Affiliations
  • University of Colorado Boulder (US)
  • University of Mississippi Medical Center (US)
  • St. Patrick Hospital (US)
  • United States Department of Agriculture (US)
  • Ames Research Center (US)
Corresponding author
Trent, Jonathan D.
ORCID
Venue
Wound Repair and Regeneration
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2009-03
Volume
17
Issue
2
Pages
163-172
ISSN
  • 1067-1927 (ISSN-L)
  • 1524-475X
DOI
10.1111/j.1524-475x.2009.00472.x
OpenAlex
W2096282426
Cited by
123
References
38
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 8 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 14 · 2013: 9 · 2012: 8
FWCI
8.82
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
onlinelibrary.wiley.com/termsAndConditions#vor (vor, 12 d)
Locations
  • Wound Repair and Regeneration (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health
  • Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Rehabilitation › Wound Healing and Treatments
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Microbial Community Ecology and Physiology
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Gut microbiota and health
Keywords
chronic wounds, wound microbiota, microbial diversity, rRNA gene sequencing, Staphylococcus, Corynebacterium, Clostridiales, Pseudomonas, novel bacterial species, wound healing
MeSH terms
Adult, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Bacterial Infections, Chronic Disease, Clostridium Infections, Corynebacterium Infections, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Mississippi, Montana, Phylogeny, Pseudomonas Infections, RNA, Bacterial, Staphylococcal Infections, Genetic Variation, Wound Infection, Bacterial Typing Techniques, Comorbidity, Polymerase Chain Reaction, Sequence Analysis, RNA

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review